Mr. Speaker, at the end of this Second Reading debate I wish to point out that the debate yesterday was probably one of the most fruitful in many years concerning the Post Office. One can probably ascribe this to the fruitful service supplied by the Post Office to the infrastructure of South Africa. I particularly wish to congratulate the new hon. members who took part in a Post Office debate for the first time, namely the hon. member for Losberg, the hon. member for Bezuidenhout and the hon. member for Durban Central. They all made a study of their subject and are an asset to this House, particularly as regards debates of this nature. I should also like to thank all the other hon. members who took part in the debate yesterday for their constructive contributions.

I should also like to take this opportunity of thanking the media for the very extensive and positive coverage given to the Post Office Vote. Here I also wish to include the dedicated liaison division of the Post Office that also helped in this regard. One local newspaper described the budget as a flower budget, referring to the disa, the flower I was wearing in my lapel. I should like to thank the Director of the Botanical Gardens, Kirstenbosch, for sending me the very first bud of spring at such short notice.

Did he send it through the post?

No, it was delivered by hand. [Interjections.]

COD!

Because inquiries were made in this regard I should just like to point out that this beautiful flower, the disa, can last for three weeks. It is one of our longest lasting veld flowers and is just as reliable as the Disa, the new telephone we are getting.

Does that mean that that telephone will also only last three weeks? [Interjections.]

Incidentally, the disa will also be the subject of one of our special stamps issued on 11 September to coincide with the tenth congress of the International Orchid Association to be held in Durban. This will be a great occasion for that city. The disa will be on one of those special stamps.

In the light of all this I find the metaphor used by the hon. member for Hillbrow to describe the Post Office somewhat inappropriate. He spoke of a patient we must examine and told us what medicine to administer. I want to put it to the hon. member that the Post Office is by no means a patient. On the contrary, I can compare the Post Office with the disa, which is also known as the “Pride of South Africa.”

That hon. member should start smoking; perhaps he would make better speeches.

If only the hon. member for Hillbrow would think of the Post Office as the pride of South Africa instead of labelling it as a patient—I see the hon. surgeon next to him is sitting there grinning—he will be able to take part effectively in a debate on how we can further stimulate and develop this wonderful Pride of South Africa.

Before I deal with the speeches of individual members, I should like to say something in general terms about the amendment moved by the official Opposition, with which the NRP agreed. The two legs of this amendment deal with staff problems and the telephone waiting list.

It is no secret that all employers in our country—both in the public and in the private sectors—are experiencing problems with certain categories of staff at the moment. The Post Office is no exception. Especially in the recruiting of male clerks and the retention of technically trained staff, the Post Office is experiencing an exceptional problem. In addition, the Post Office also has a problem in certain problem areas in the country, particularly the PWV area, where in the first place it has great difficulty finding clerical staff. In the second place, technical staff are hesitant to move from other parts of the country to that high density area. As regards technical staff, the Post Office in our country is the largest single employer and trainer of staff in this connection, and in addition it intensifies its training programmes from year to year, and also believes in broadening the base of such trained staff.

I was interested to hear the comment of Prof. Jan Sadie of the University of Stellenbosch, who said that he understands this particular problem of the Post Office. However, there will always be interaction. One of the hon. members said that higher salaries were luring people away. Nevertheless my attitude to the private sector is not one of reproach, but I say they must make use of the facilities afforded the private sector by the hon. Minister of Finance in respect of the training of certain manpower. Last year I received representations from a very large employer in the private sector who also has this problem. The representations were to the effect that I intercede with the hon. the Minister of Internal Affairs to get trained staff under contract from a friendly country. This was a request I supported with pleasure. Here we at least have one of the large undertakings in the private sector trying to do its share and not poaching our staff. The question regarding our staff problems is: What are we doing? In my Second Reading speech I gave a complete exposition of what the Post Office is doing regarding this situation, but as a result of the debate which took place here I should like to re-emphasize certain of our plans.

In the first place I refer to the training of staff. I should like to tell the hon. members of the Opposition, who are so fond of telling us that the solution lies in the training and employment of non-White staff, that the number of non-Whites on the establishment of the Post Office increased from about 19 000 in 1972 to 32 000 in March 1980. During the past four years the number of non-White staff increased by 1 746, 1 321, 1 141 and 1 619 in the latest financial year. To this I should add that there has been a quantitative growth in the non-White staff of the Post Office during the past two years. In the meanwhile our establishment has also been affected by neighbouring countries gaining independence and Post Office functions being transferred to them. By 31 March 1980, 1 153 non-White staff members had already been transferred to other administrations and during the past year a further 1 400 non-White staff members were transferred. I am not even mentioning the White staff. I am therefore trying to impress painstakingly upon hon. members, especially the hon. member for Hillbrow, that we have been occupied for some time already with what he sees as the solution.

In addition to the training of White staff and non-White staff in well-equipped training centres, I have personally gone out of my way and made an appeal to the leaders of the national States when I have had the opportunity to have talks with them, to impress upon their education departments in particular the need for such manpower from their own communities for the Post Office, but the people recruited must have school level mathematics and physical science. The reaction has been wonderful. A while ago I received a letter from the Chief Minister of Lebowa in which he said that this had made a great impression on him and he had asked his education department to give special attention to it. I did the same with the Chief Minister of the Ciskei and the Chief Minister of Gazankulu. It is therefore a question of how readily people with that school background will be available. After that the Post Office does the rest and trains the people. We are also undertaking recruitment overseas. We have already advertised in the European newspapers and we have already received over 500 enquiries from people in the United Kingdom alone in reaction to the advertisements. We have found that the present economic recession there affords us a potential field for recruitment. We followed up the advertisement campaign with a delegation which left for the United Kingdom on Tuesday, the day I delivered my speech. The hon. member for Umhlanga must not stare at me in such amazement. Yesterday I myself was amazed when he told us that I was supposed to have said on television that we were having problems with the recruitment of overseas workers.

Mr. Speaker, the real problem is how to overcome one’s manpower problem. What does one do with less manpower as regards productivity? I think that this must be our criterion. During the past financial year 276 000 new telephone services were supplied, in addition to about 150 000 transfers, which require the same manpower. This means that during that financial year over 400 000 services were dealt with. This is a tremendous increase over the past year. This is as regards transfer and installation of new telephones. In the previous financial year, 164 000 additional automatic services were made available which naturally include some of these new telephone services. These are new automisation services at the exchanges. It is expected that this year there will be an increased capacity for 175 000 automatic services.

If we look at the capital budget we see that the amount in the current year is R160 million more than in the previous year. This gives an immediately indication of the increased scope of the activities of the Post Office. In the course of the current year we are going to install 22 electronic exchanges. In Johannesburg alone, as regards the handling of postal articles, we had to handle an additional 10 million postal articles a month, a growth of about 18% within a year. We must also bear in mind that in the previous year and in the current year we have had unexpected natural and other disasters. The automatic exchange in Yeoville burnt down and had to be replaced. We also had the flood disaster here at Laingsburg, and not long after that we had the flood disaster in the Port Elizabeth area. If those disasters made demands of other bodies then they made particularly high demands of the Post Office. The Post Office had to leave construction works it was engaged in to repair these services. Against this background one must surely realize that a smaller staff, particularly a smaller technical staff, handled these rapidly expanding services during the past year. This is the real test in respect of productivity, because productivity improved. A few days ago I also said we are constantly involved in retraining technical staff to adapt them to new technologies. I am pleased that hon. members of both Oppositions are agreed that one of the most obvious things we must do is create housing facilities. I am very pleased about this and I shall have more to say about it later on.

I wish to point out that in the current financial year we have made provision for official housing costing R14,5 million, particularly in the problem areas. Hon. members opposite said Durban was also a problem area. I can assure them that that area has also been included. The provision of official housing is not falling behind. I can quote figures to the hon. member for Umhlanga. In Durban alone during the past year R1,1 million was spent on official housing and at Empangeni R7 million was spent. At Vryheid, too, official quarters were purchased for a very large sum. Therefore Natal is not lagging behind. In addition, the Post Office’s departmental housing scheme which was only introduced last year got into its stride so quickly that this year we made provision for R26 million because we cannot wait for three years to retain the staff we must retain. We must do so immediately. I am grateful for the support for this measure which comes from the Opposition as well. But I do want to add that these special plans were put into operation in addition to the existing 100% loan scheme for all servants of the State. That loan scheme makes provision for subsidized interest rates and has been in operation for several years now. We took the new steps in an effort to overcome the staff problem.

I appreciate the support from the Opposition for the fact that we on our part are doing so much in respect of housing. However, it so happens that when one of our Sunday newspapers took the lead a few months ago, a few others, although they did not inquire into the matter very extensively, followed suit and claimed that the Post Office was providing its people with luxury accommodation. It was even alleged that up to R100 000 was being spent on one dwelling unit while it was subsequently being made available to the staff at a low rental. The hon. member for Hillbrow, who is never able to control himself in such cases and always gets taken in by uninformed newspaper reports, was very quickly on the scene. Just listen to this report—

Was that before or after Sparks?

Well, I think it was more or less at the same time. It could have been before the departure of a gentleman by the name of Sparks.

*What is the truth as far as this story is concerned? We are constructing two flat complexes in Pretoria on the so-called “Three Lilies” site, where there used to be a post office. There will be altogether 100 flat units, some of which will be two-and others three-bedroom flats. Provision is being made for the future installation of telecommunications equipment in the basement of that building. Bear in mind that we are dealing here with an area which probably has the highest population density in Pretoria, for it is situated near Sunnyside. We estimate the cost in respect of the excavation of the basement and its further preparation to be R2 million, but the figures which were used with such abandon by certain newspapers indicated that the project would cost R10 million. The tender was for just over R8 million, but subsequently, with the conclusion of the contract, we reduced it to R7,4 million for the entire complex including the R2 million for the basement. There is, of course, escalation of costs as the building progresses.

Appeals are being made here in Parliament to the effect that we must provide proper housing to retain our staff, but when we establish something decent, there is talk of “extravagance” and this is done without the hon. member first having ascertained the facts. [Interjections.] I am now furnishing the hon. member with the facts which he did not check before issuing the statement, but when I give them to him it is like water on a duck’s back because he does not take any notice of them. Perhaps I should give him a pocket calculator so that he can calculate what it will cost.

Here are clear signs of the game which was being played when that Sunday newspaper in particular began to report on this matter. An architect who was in charge of that scheme was quoted as having said that it would be so luxurious that there would even be automatic washing machines and goodness knows what else. Surely it is not the function of an architect to install such things; he had to draw up plans for plugs in the walls so that every inhabitant is able to connect his own appliances to the electricity supply. This is the pernicious picture that is being presented and then the hon. member for Hillbrow falls for it. He then makes the speeches he should be making in Parliament to the Rand Daily Mail, as he did this week as well.

Let me nevertheless say that I am grateful that there is agreement in Opposition ranks that housing in particular is the sphere in which we can do something about the staff position.

†The hon. member for Bezuidenhout and the hon. member for Durban Central referred to the so-called Ridgard Committee in regard to the staff shortage in especially the technical field. In this connection I can inform the two hon. members as well as other hon. members who referred to this aspect that the Ridgard Committee was appointed before the report of the South African Telecommunications Association appeared in the Press.

*Consequently the Post Office was wide-awake and at that early stage already, appointed a committee in which the staff associations were involved.

†The second part of the amendment refers to the so-called telephone backlog. I should like to state categorically today that in a developing country like South Africa there will always be a backlog in regard to the telephone service. In times of economic recession there is a decline in the demand for telephones while in an economic boom it escalates. I can refer hon. members to percentages regarding the backlog during the past decade and they can then compare that with the total number of telephones in use during that time. Just before 1971 the percentage was as high as 12,39%, but this figure gradually declined to 4,45% in 1979, when we experienced a recession. In 1980 the figure rose to 6,8%, and in March this year it was 7,89%. It is therefore evident that in times of recession the demand declines while in times of a booming economy it increases. However, there is nothing irregular about that because if we compare our situation with that of Spain, for instance, which is also a developing country, we find that their backlog is 652 000.

How does that help us? We are not in Spain.

Of course we are not in Spain, but I am attempting to prove the trend in comparable countries …

What is their population?

Spain has a backlog of 652 000 and a total of 7 million telephones, which represents a backlog of 9,7%. Austria, a developed country and one with which we cannot compare ourselves, has a waiting list this year of 158 000, about 12 000 more than we have, and approximately 2 million telephones are available.

How many in Ecuador?

I am not mad. If the hon. member wants to become mad, I do not. I am trying to compare our situation with that in comparable countries.

In the case of Austria, the backlog represents 7,8% of the total number of telephones available there. France, one of the most highly developed countries in Western Europe, has very close to a million applications on their waiting list, which represents 6,6% of the total number of just less than 14 million telephones available. In other words, we are not doing so badly. The Opposition emphasized the increase in the backlog during the past year when we experienced a high growth rate. During the past year the backlog increased by 37 000, but the emphasis should rather fall on the 270 000 additional telephones that were installed and the 150 000 transfers of telephones dealt with during last year, which in actual terms is 64 500 more than the previous year and, in my opinion, was quite an achievement.

In the course of the past year 21 manual exchanges were transformed into automatic exchanges; 19 new automatic exchanges were installed; 11 existing ones were replaced by larger volumes; 98 automatic exchanges were extended, and in the course of this year 22 digital or fully electronic exchanges will be installed. These figures exclude the figures for Transkei, Bophuthatswana and Venda.

Mr. Speaker, there is, after all, a limit to what can be achieved in any particular year. Firstly one has to watch one’s finances. I have already informed the House that in the course of this year our capital expenditure will go up by more than R150 million, which gives an indication of the increased activity in this particular regard. There certainly is a limit. Secondly, we also have to rely on the capacity of the suppliers. It is all very well to tell me we have to install one million new telephones in a given year, but we have to rely on the output of our suppliers. One cannot provide more than one gets from one’s suppliers, and one has to plan and order some two years in advance. Thirdly, one has to program for expansion in particular centres, and if one is busy with one particular job, one cannot, all of a sudden, decide to switch teams over to another project. Fourthly, there is the question of unexpected disasters, such as those we experienced during the past financial year. Because of the urgent need for services in such areas, one consequently has to hasten one’s construction teams to the troubled spots.

The hon. member for Hillbrow wanted to know what we were going to do about the suggestion of the Advocate-General about amending the Post Office Act. The Prime Minister indicated last year that the report had been referred to the Rabie Commission. We still await the Rabie Commission’s report on that, and when we do receive it, we shall amend the legislation, if necessary.

When will the Rabie Commission’s report be available?

When he has finished writing his report.

I am not the Minister of Justice. When the opportunity arises, the hon. member should ask him.

He sits just behind you; so ask him.

Put your question to Judge Rabie.

The hon. member for Hillbrow also asked me questions about the out of court settlement in respect of proceedings instituted by two officials of the HNP. I wonder what the hon. member’s idea is in coming to this House and playing propaganda games for the HNP.

He is looking after the public’s money.

Who is paying the costs?

First of all the hon. member asked me why we decided not to carry on with the court case. That hon. member is a legal man. I am not. I do know, however, that in a case such as this we obtain legal advice, and the advice in this case was that we should settle in order to save costs.

That is what I was afraid of.

The settlement was therefore not in terms of a court finding. In terms of the report of the Advocate-General …

You had no case.

… it was found that there was what one could actually describe as a technical defect in the handling of the situation. [Interjections.] Of course! [Interjections.]

Is it a question of the relevant Minister suffering from a technical defect?

I know of several people who suffer from technical defects, in some cases perhaps more than just technical defects. [Interjections.]

I bet you do.

The hon. member went on to state that in terms of the settlement the two gentlemen of the HNP were to be paid R10 000 each.

R1 000 plus costs.

The hon. member said R10 000. It is in Hansard and is therefore public knowledge.

What is R9 000 between friends?

What is R9 000 between friends? Unfortunately we are not friends. The court will decide on costs, and the hon. member for Hillbrow should, being a legal man himself, have known that when he asked me: “Who must pay the costs?”

What were your own costs?

The hon. member should know, in terms of the relevant Act, what happens in a case like this. It is not necessary for me to explain, for he is a legal man.

In other words, the taxpayers are paying for your technical defect?

The hon. member for Hillbrow also asked me who gave permission for the tapping of that particular telephone line.

Who did it?

The hon. member knows the Act and he therefore knows the contents of section 118A.

He reads it every night.

Who reads it?

The hon. member for Hillbrow.

The hon. member for Hillbrow knows well enough who is the functionary in this case. But I am not, on account of his question, going to drag the names of individuals across the floor of the House. I wish to refer the hon. member to the last paragraph of the Advocate-General’s report, paragraph 15.0, where he says—

*In view of this finding of the Advocate-General, I do not want to play the hon. member’s little game of mentioning the names of individuals who, according to the finding of the Advocate-General had acted bona fide. There were technical deficiencies in their actions, and why should I now mention their names in this House for his amusement?

That is slow thinking.

I want to add that the hon. member admitted that, although he was opposed in principle to the interception of certain things, it might at times be necessary to do so. He said this yesterday. I now want to ask the hon. member, with reference to the questions he put and the argument he advanced here yesterday, whether he is aware of the Advocate-General’s findings in this regard.

Yes, I have the report.

The Advocate-General found in paragraph 4.2—

He goes on to say—

That is, in national security—

In other words, since the hon. member concedes in principle that it is sometimes necessary, we have a case here where the Advocate-General found that it was in fact necessary. Why does the hon. member rake up this matter on this occasion if he does not want to make a little publicity for the HNP.

They are partners, after all.

The hon. member also asked me to give the assurance that the communications of members of Parliament and of political parties would not be intercepted. I have already given that assurance twice in this House. It seems to me this is now becoming a case of, as an Afrikaans poet said, playing “op my ou ramkietjie met net een snaar”. The hon. member is persisting with this matter just for the sake of the publicity he can gain from it.

Is that assurance valid for today?

Mr. Speaker, may I ask the hon. the Minister whether that assurance includes me as well?

Of course. Actually, I gave that hon. member that assurance personally in the debate last year. The hon. member asked me the question and not the hon. member for Hillbrow.

I want it again now.

You are not that important.

Are you scared?

Mr. Speaker, I am dealing with the hon. member for Hillbrow. I said earlier on that the hon. member has the habit of making statements to the Press just before a debate in this House. My budget speech was delivered on Tuesday, and in the Rand Daily Mail of that morning I found a news item reporting that the hon. member for Hillbrow had said to the paper—

Fair enough. But then the report continues as follows—

These were the figures in February, before the end of the financial year. But in the course of my present budget speech I gave the real figure for the previous financial year. It amounted to R110 million. I forgive the hon. member, but my point is that his way of thinking is completely wrong, because the surplus in the previous financial year is not available now. In terms of our budgeting it has already been used for our capital programme of the previous year. The hon. member, being the chief Opposition speaker on Post Office affairs, should really know that because it is quite obvious from our budget documents.

Then, to my surprise, I read the following in the report in the Rand Daily Mail—

The report appeared early on Tuesday morning—

The hon. member then already had the Bill on his desk since the previous Thursday. Interest rates are not raised by way of legislation, but by way of regulation. The hon. member should know by now what the legislation deals with, but he is reported in the Rand Daily Mail of Tuesday morning as having said that he expected the Minister to announce legislation to provide for higher interest rates.

That is a very poor point. That is splitting hairs.

No, I am not splitting hairs. I am trying to educate the hon. member. If he really wishes to be the chief Opposition spokesman he should make a better study of what it is all about. [Interjections.]

Then the hon. member and also the hon. member for Umhlanga made the point that as regards staff we should really compete with the private sector in terms of salaries. Let me be very frank. That is simply impossible. If we were to be in a position to put up salaries to the level applying in the private sector, do hon. members know what would happen? The private sector would merely put up their salaries once again. The point at issue is that, although the Post Office is independent of the Commission for Administration, the fact is that we have to co-ordinate nevertheless. After all, the Post Office is also a State institution. We have to co-ordinate at least. The hon. member for Durban Point asked me yesterday whether I had on any single occasion given higher salary benefits …

He did not ask you that.

Yes, he asked me that. He asked me that with reference to increases granted by the Commission for Administration.

He did not ask you that.

But, Sir, it is in Hansard.

He did not ask you that.

Sir, this is the hon. member with whom I had to quarrel about what I had said or had not said. Now he is quarrelling with me once again about something I myself heard yesterday from the mouth of the hon. member for Durban Point and which I have read in Hansard.

He did not ask you that.

The point is, Mr. Speaker, that the hon. member can discuss the matter with me again later. If he can prove me wrong, he can point out to me what the hon. member for Durban Point actually said. Should I be proved wrong, I will readily admit it.

Across the floor of the House?

Yes.

Will you admit it across the floor of the House?

If I can be proved wrong, yes.

Right.

Mr. Speaker, the fact is that we simply have to co-ordinate. The Post Office is also a Government institution, and therefore it has to co-ordinate. The hon. member for Umhlanga, however, actually pleaded for some sort of system in terms of which the Post Office will become almost as independent as, for instance, Sasol. He pleads for a system in which the Post Office will actually be in a position to sell shares to the public at large. I wonder if the hon. member can tell me what will happen then. Does he know what will happen? If we should move in that direction, the private sector will practically take over the worthwhile side of the Post Office, and, as is the case in some other countries, leave it to the Government, to the hon. the Minister of Finance, to use the taxpayer’s money—not money derived from tariffs—to subsidize losses on the postal and telegram services.

*Quite apart from the fact that he made a very good speech, the hon. member for Sunnyside asked me what our planning was with regard to the system of video conferences, and also as far as other cities besides Cape Town and Pretoria were concerned, where the system would initially be put into operation. We hope to hold a trial demonstration of the system between Cape Town and Pretoria during October. If circumstances and space permit, we shall even invite hon. members who are interested in it to come and have a look. As soon as this system, for which the greatest need exists between Pretoria and Cape Town—the legislative and the executive capitals—has proved itself, we plan to extend to Johannesburg and Durban, and gradually to all the major cities in this country. As far as we can ascertain there is no real need yet for this system as far as international communications are concerned. This is a matter which we shall look into again in future.

Furthermore the hon. member referred to recruitment efforts and to the necessity for publicity in that regard. In the same breath I also want to tell the hon. member for Bezuidenhout that the R750 000 which we budgeted for publicity this year, for radio and television publicity in particular, pertains to recruiting in particular.

†I do not quarrel with the hon. member about what he has pleaded for. He wants the services of the Post Office to be advertized as well. We shall do that too. This amount, however, will mainly be used in an attempt to recruit staff.

*I want to give the hon. member the assurance that this money will primarily be spent on recruitment, in a further attempt to promote employment in the Post Office with the aid of the media.

†The hon. member for Umhlanga expressed some very constructive ideas, for which I thank him. The hon. member complained about postal services and described them as not adequate to comply with the needs of a modem economy.

Hear, hear!

The hon. member sitting behind him says “Hear, hear!” Let me just put it to the hon. member that in Johannesburg alone we have recorded a growth figure of 18% in terms of postal articles handled within the period of one year. This figure represents an increase of 3 million in the number of postal articles handled per month. This clearly points out that there is still a tremendous growth. Even electronic mail can never completely replace normal mail. On the other hand, there has been an increase in the amount of normal mail. Perhaps this relates to what the hon. member described as “junk mail” in his speech yesterday. I am really grateful for his suggestion in this respect. I can inform the hon. member, however, that the Post Office is giving attention to this particular problem on a day-to-day basis. Perhaps we can decide upon other hours for the handing in of this “junk mail”. One can make arrangements where mail is received in bulk that the so-called junk mail can be handled at different hours, but eventually it has to be delivered either by hand or by means of the post box to the individual, and that is where the problem is eventually encountered. The hon. member is aware, and I have also referred to it, of the automatic sorting machines that are to be introduced in Pretoria even for non-standardized mail as well.

The hon. member also asked that more work should be given out to the private sector. My question to the hon. member is: At what price? We can give out specific jobs, and, as I have already explained in my speech, we are doing that right now. We prefer to give out work to the private sector in the form of contract jobs. However, it is also a fact that some of our main suppliers, in the case of major contracts, do the installation themselves at the expense of the Post Office.

I have already referred to the question of housing. The hon. member as well as the hon. member for Durban Central raised this. I have already given the figures as far as official housing is concerned. For Durban it is R1,1 million and for Empangeni, R0,7 million. The hon. member also referred to the problem of officials, for example postmasters, who have to live quite a distance from their place of work. I can inform the hon. member that we do pay these officials who have to travel quite a distance, by the kilometre or by the mile. There is also an arrangement that those who have to make use of buses and trains can be refunded in some way or the other. We try to get them at their place of work at a more convenient time or at less cost.

I have told the hon. member that we hope to introduce electronic exchanges this year also in other parts of the country. It is perhaps just as well that I inform the House about this because people in all the other centres, outside Pretoria and Johannesburg, will also be interested.

*The additional 20 electronic exchanges for this financial year were allocated as follows: In the Cape Town area: Hanover Park, Clareinch, Leeusig and Parow; in the Pretoria area: Pretoria, Mamelodi East and Mamelodi West, Laudium, Hatfield, Sunny-side and Waterkloof; the Witwatersrand area: Rosebank, Vaal Park and Kwaxuma and Iketlo; the Bloemfontein area: Bloemfontein itself, Hamilton, the large new industrial area, Heidedal, that is the Coloured township there, and Wilgehof; and in the Durban area: Durban and Pinetown.

†This is for the current year.

The hon. member also referred to the good relations that exist between the regional office of the department in Durban and the Chamber of Commerce in Durban. It is good to hear that, and I am very pleased with the initiatives being taken there. However, I can inform the hon. member that the same holds good for Cape Town, Bloemfontein, Pretoria and Johannesburg. The regional directors and other senior officials of the department try at all times to co-operate with the private sector, with the Chambers of Commerce, the Handelsinstituut, the FCI and others. In the case of my own constituency, the previous postmaster, who is now at Welkom in the Orange Free State, served for three years at Stellenbosch as the secretary of the local Afrikaanse Sakekamer.

*The hon. member for Overvaal made a speech yesterday in which he revealed very great insight and in particular gave a sound explanation of the finances, the tariff policy as well as the investments of the Post Office. I want to thank him sincerely for that.

The hon. member for Maitland gave us a very good description of the history of the development of the postal service as well as the present tremendous scope of the postal service. In addition the hon. member asked whether it was not also possible for us to decentralize Potelin, i.e. the telextronic institute of the Post Office, or parts thereof from Pretoria to the Western Cape. I just want to tell him that we are still considering this matter to see whether it is not possible to do so. Because a fair number of trained staff is available for that here, we are thinking of moving it to this area where it will have the further advantage of being situated near two universities which provide training in this field.

†The hon. member for Bezuidenhout discussed the question of the standardization of mail and he actually asked me to call in the Bureau of Standards in order to assist us to bring this about. I should like to inform the hon. member that we have been working on this for some time now. We do make use of standardized mail nowadays. If the hon. member would visit the General Post Office here in Cape Town he will be able to see how the sorting machine operates. He will notice that that machine handles only standardized mail. The non-standardized mail is ejected and this mail is processed manually at a later stage. I should also like to tell him that we intend installing a sorting machine in Pretoria which will even be able to handle the non-standardized mail. It is because of this fact, however, that we have had to raise our charges for non-standardized mail. It is obviously labour-saving if one has a larger quantity of standardized mail. However, I am very grateful that the hon. member supports us in what we are doing. We also inform the public at large and commerce and industry regularly about the different sizes of standardized mail.

The hon. member also said that the Post Office was underpaid in relation to the agency work that it does on behalf of other Government departments. One is always grateful to receive that sort of support from the Opposition. However, I want to point out to the hon. member that we do have an arrangement whereby we work out the actual cost leaving a certain margin of profit. The levies that are imposed in this regard are reviewed each year and I can assure the hon. member that we are not running those agency services at a loss. In the long run, however, we are rendering these agency services in the national interest and this is of great importance to the Post Office.

The hon. member also made a plea for the Giro system and he suggested that this whole question should be referred to the Select Committee on Posts-and Telecommunications. I am afraid, Sir, that that is not the function of that particular Select Committee. We require more professional knowledge in this regard. I may just inform the hon. member that this so-called Giro system is already outdated, even in our country, and it will be replaced by the modern Electronic Funds Transfer System, the so-called EFTS. I am pleased to say that we have for some time been actively engaged in planning this national EFTS system in which the Post Office will participate on an equal basis with banks and building societies. It is hoped that this system will be introduced during the course of next year.

The hon. member also pleaded for an extension of the savings services of the Post Office. I should like to say that although the percentage that the Post Office is able to attract at the moment is just below 5% of the national figure, we have at all times in terms of the law to co-ordinate with the hon. the Minister of Finance. As long as we can obtain 5% that will be sufficient to enable the Post Office to continue with its capital works. I have already referred to the hon. member’s plea in so far as advertising is concerned.

What about raising the interest rate on Savings Bank certificates to 10%.

We can do that, but we have to co-ordinate with the interest rates announced by the hon. the Minister of Finance. We also have to keep an eye on the building societies and the banks. We only have a small part to play in this regard and we do not want to be blamed by other financial institutions.

What about raising the amount from R10 000 to R25 000?

That is something which we investigate regularly in co-ordination with the hon. the Minister of Finance.

*The hon. member for Rosettenville referred to a very interesting development, viz. the use of fibreglass cables. The first one to be used on an experimental basis in our country is being put into operation on 19 October. A cable of this nature has a far greater carrying capacity than the standard metal cables of today. It works in accordance with a different principle and is entirely resistant to interference. Powerlines and thunderstorms cannot cause any interference and even wet weather which often causes interference in the telephone service, does not influence it. The first fibreglass cable will extend over a few kilometres and as soon as fibreglass cables are economically worthwhile, the traditional cables will gradually be replaced. Quite apart from the fact that it is resistant to interference, it is also able to carry a greater volume of traffic.

The hon. member for Losberg pointed out that the staff should think of the security which the Post Office offered them and that they should not simply allow themselves to be tempted by temporarily higher offers, only to realize a little while later that they had made a mistake. I am grateful to the hon. member for his support in this regard.

He made a very positive suggestion in connection with postal delivery. He said that postal delivery to homes was a luxury. I want to agree with him. This is the reason why the Post Office is engaged in constructing self-service centres, particularly in new townships, in which centres there are post boxes as well. The postal articles are placed in them and everyone comes and fetches them. I believe, if space permits, that we must expand our post box system even further, for we shall be able to save labour in that way. One of our great losses is in fact caused by the delivery of post by hand. I do not mean, of course, that the post is lost, but it costs us a lot, for there are many people who have to deliver the post on foot. I, personally, believe in post boxes or service centres. Hon. members are probably aware that the rental charge for post boxes has remained constant at R5 since the ’sixties. I believe that if we could persuade more people to make use of post boxes or service centres which would then save us that manpower, this would be a great advantage. I want to thank the hon. member for the suggestion.

†As a new member the hon. member for Durban Central made a very good contribution. I have already dealt with his comments on the technical staff and the training of Blacks. I have also dealt with his remarks on housing. As far as his plea for facilities for disabled persons at a post office is concerned, I can inform him that in all our new buildings provision is made for such persons. Where it is possible, we also provide facilities in our existing buildings if the need occurs and the structural situation allows it. I am very grateful to the hon. member for his contribution.

*The hon. member for the Free State, if I may refer to him in that way, gave an excellent description of the tremendous scope of the activities of the Post Office. It is indeed true that it affects every individual in some way or other.

Let me say, finally, that the staff of the Post Office is like a family, a hard working, loyal family which is loyal to its country and well motivated.

Question put: That all the words after “That” stand part of the Question,

I listened with considerable interest to the reply of the hon. the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications today, and I should like to react immediately to what he had to say. Firstly I want to refer to the telephone backlog. Let me say at once that referring to the number of telephones outstanding in Spain, or any other country for that matter, is no excuse for a lack of telephones here. We are concerned with South Africa. South Africa has its own postal and telecommunications service, which is a viable entity. It is a business in its own right, with its own Act, and cannot therefore be compared to other services. It is this hon. Minister’s responsibility to deal with the backlog, and his failure to do so is his fault. It is up to him to come along with some or other operation comparable to Operation Soweto to wipe out the backlog.

Secondly, I wish to comment on the hon. the Minister’s reference to the Rand Daily Mail. I think he should rather have praised me for saying that there had been no tariff increases.

You should make your speech here and not in the Rand Daily Mail.

If a reporter telephones me and asks me what my view is, I am entitled to say how I see things. I am not the only one, however, who said that. If the hon. the Minister had read Oggendblad on Tuesday morning, he would have found the very same sort of report there, and who leaked that information to Oggendblad? I did not speak to reporters of Oggendblad. Where did they get the information from? [Interjections.]

Order!

This brings me to some important aspects in connection with section 118A. I put a number of questions to this hon. Minister during the Second Reading debate and I was hoping he would give me a reply. I must admit that he did answer one question by giving us the assurance that no one’s telephone was being tapped and that no one’s post—including that of the hon. member for Houghton—was being intercepted.

But I did just that.

That is exactly what the hon. member for Hillbrow has said.

Yes, as I said, the hon. the Minister did give that assurance and, since his previous assurance was given more than a year ago, it was necessary to have this particular assurance from him so that one could know that at this moment in time there was no telephone tapping or interception of mail. The Act, however, has not yet been amended, even though a loophole in the Act was clearly disclosed by the Acting Advocate General. In that report he stated very clearly that it could be done without the hon. the Minister’s knowledge. If that is so, how can the hon. the Minister get up in the House today and give us an assurance that no one’s telephone is being tapped and no one’s mail is being intercepted without his knowledge, as has happened on previous occasions? Can the hon. the Minister stand up in all good faith—and does he have the assurance of the Security Council and his colleagues, the other hon. Ministers in this regard—and tell us that this is not happening? That is the point.

The next point is that I asked the hon. the Minister a number of questions. I asked him whether it was correct that he paid R1 000 in damages and costs of between R20 000 and R30 000 but I received no reply. I asked the hon. the Minister whether it was correct that he had settled the case and I asked why he had settled the case. Did he want to leave the public under the impression that because he had settled the case he had no case to defend? I also asked the hon. the Minister who was going to pay the costs. What reply did I get? The hon. the Minister replied that, firstly, on obtaining legal advice, it was found that there was a technical defect. There are a number of lawyers here, including you, Mr. Chairman. Has anyone ever heard of settling a case because of a technical defect in that sense?

No.

If I am to use my legal knowledge, my reply to the hon. the Minister at this stage is that the answers he has given to the House are vague and embarrassing in legal terms. They are totally unsatisfactory as far as the answers are concerned that we on this side of the House and the public of South Africa are entitled to. I ask the hon. the Minister again: Was this done on his authority and, if not, on whose authority was it done? If the hon. the Minister settled this case, what were the costs?

I happen to know that if one settles a case, one has either to agree to the costs as part and parcel of the settlement or otherwise one agrees to a settlement on the basis that one will pay the taxed costs. Which is it? Is the hon. the Minister waiting to know what the taxed costs are or, did he know what his costs are because his attorneys and advocates would have told him what his costs are. If he has to tax the costs of the other side, he will, at a later stage, have to know what those costs are. The hon. the Minister cannot tell me that he does not know at this stage what the costs amount to. What is more important is that he gave an embarrassing reply in that he was not able to tell us who had to pay. Must I and other hon. members on both sides of the House pay the hon. the Minister’s costs out of our taxes or is the hon. the Minister himself going to pay the costs? There are two interesting things about this. The first is that when I had raised this matter, the hon. member for Sunnyside followed me immediately and did not utter a word of criticism, although I had brought up this case of the HNP. The hon. member for Overvaal, however, who followed the hon. member for Sunnyside some time later, criticized me. Where do the sympathies lie in this particular matter? I assume that the hon. member for Sunnyside, in failing to criticize me, is in sympathy with the case I put and with regard to the payment of costs.

I also want to draw the hon. the Minister’s attention to something else. The hon. the Minister is responsible for administering the Post Office Act. The Post Office Act gives the hon. the Minister a great deal of power. I want to refer the hon. the Minister to section 12R of the Post Office Act, No. 44 of 1958, which deals with the recovery of losses and damages. It reads—

the Postmaster-General shall determine the amount of such loss or damage and, subject to the provisions of subsection (5), order, by notice in writing, the said person to pay to him, within 30 days from the date of such notice, the amount so determined.

If an employee of the department causes the department loss, this is what he can expect. Is there any reason, therefore, why the principles of the Post Office Act should not apply to the hon. the Minister?

I am no Post Office official.

What is so funny about it?

He is laughing.

He is laughing all the way to the bank with our money!

It’s a clown’s mask, man.

In all sincerity and in earnest I want to say that this is a very, very important matter which touches the heart and the pocket of every single citizen in South Africa. The hon. the Minister is involved in this and I think that we and the public of South Africa are entitled to clear and unequivocal answers and not veiled and embarrassing statements by the hon. the Minister in trying to evade the entire issue.

I do not have much time left and I hope perhaps at a later stage to deal with the other aspects, but I still want to raise the question of housing, for which R14,5 million has been set aside. The hon. the Minister referred to the newspaper report, which I have here too, which appeared under the heading “Post Office flats will be going for a song at R65 per month”. This refers to the block of flats called Leamington Court which is in the constituency of the hon. member for Houghton. Sir, the people concerned came to cry on my shoulder—not on the shoulder of the hon. the Minister. The rentals were very substantial. These people were paying between R350 and R375 per month. The hon. the Minister can tell me whether it is correct that the Post Office employees who are going to be housed in these particular flats are going to pay between a minimum of R16,50 and a ceiling of R65 per month. Is that what they are going to pay? Let me make our position clear. We fully support the R14,5 million for housing. We say the Post Office staff should be provided with housing.

What are you complaining about then?

I am complaining about the Post Office competing with private enterprise in taking existing blocks of flats and chucking people out of their own flats when it knows full well that the benefits under the Rent Control Act applicable to people in the private sector are not applicable to the Post Office because it is a Government department. They cannot claim that protection. Even the protected tenants under section 19(1)(a) of the Housing Act, those who fall within the relevant limits, cannot claim that protection. In the circumstances I want that information from the hon. the Minister. We are entirely in favour of the Post Office providing housing for its employees. When it comes to recruiting people from overseas and encouraging them by providing them with housing, we are in favour of that, but is it fair to expropriate a large number of blocks of flats?

There was no expropriation. Where did you find that?

I shall deal more fully with this in the Third Reading. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Hillbrow made a big fuss here, produced a tremendous cloud of steam and made out as if he was terribly upset about the question of the so-called tapping of the telephones of certain members of the HNP.

Tackle him!

We have always wondered whether the HNP has a representative in this House, and I think we have now found out who he is, because the hon. member for Hillbrow …

The member for Yeoville represents the HNP.

Harry thought you were speaking about him.

Yes, he felt guilty; that is why he is leaving now. He thought I was speaking about him. The hon. member for Hillbrow is terribly upset and is in fact championing the cause of the HNP.

Widman for the White man! (Widman vir die Witman!)

The HNP does not have a direct representative here, but it may, as in the case of the HNP’s slogans, be a case of “Widman vir die Witman”.

As I say, the hon. member for Hillbrow is apparently concerned about the question of the tapping of telephone conversations, etc. However, the hon. the Minister has given him the assurance that the telephone conver-

sations of members of the official Opposition are not tapped.

I accept that.

If the hon. member accepts it, then why is he still wailing about it? Why does he not drop the subject?

What about all the other Ministers who can do it?

When the hon. the Minister gives them the assurance that their telephones are not being tapped, they must accept it.

Why should they be afraid of having their telephones tapped?

That is a good question. Why are they afraid if they are not engaged in something that we must not hear about?

Because it has happened before.

In this debate the official Opposition has again shown how irrelevant they have really become in South Africa. For the umpteenth year the hon. the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications has submitted a brilliant budget. However, what do hon. members of the official Opposition come up with? They contend that we should not accept it. The public at large, the ordinary voters, are all satisfied with this budget. They are very grateful because there are no tariff increases. However, the official Opposition maintains that we should not accept it as it stands. I am really convinced that the official Opposition are not only irrelevant and out of touch with the political realities of South Africa, but also that they are unable to evaluate the functions of a department like the Post Office properly. That is why I say that they are totally irrelevant in the context of the realities we have to deal with in South Africa, as they have once again shown in the discussion of this budget. I think that they are hopelessly lost. We should therefore rather ignore them.

However, there is a local matter I should like to bring to the attention of the hon. the Minister. In a decade of breathtaking technological miracles in virtually every sphere it is still the case that an efficient basic postal service is still indispensable to modem man in our present-day society. It may that the wonderful art of letter-writing which we used to know, the good old newsy letter, may unfortunately be becoming a lost art. However this by no means detracts from the urgent need for good and efficient postal services. On the contrary, the data in the annual report show that the number of articles of mail dealt with annually by the Post Office is inexorably increasing throughout the country. This state of affairs necessarily results in occasional troublesome bottlenecks, in which case the necessary adjustments and expansions have to be carried out. At Verwoerdburg post office …

Where is that? What place are you talking about now?

It is the most beautiful town in the country, as the hon. the Minister is of course aware.

Except for Delmas, of course. [Interjections.]

Unfortunately such a situation exists at the post office in my town. It is a situation which, if it cannot be speedily rectified, will give rise to great dissatisfaction among my voters. I therefore call upon the hon. the Minister please to help so that relief may be afforded there without delay.

To motivate my request I should like to bring the following facts to the attention of the hon. the Minister. The number of financial transactions handled at that post office during the 1977-’78 financial year was 87 000. In the 1980-’81 financial year this number had increased to 110 000. The number of articles of registered mail handled there during the 1977-’78 financial year was 141 000, and by the 1980-’81 financial year the number had increased to 236 000.

In my constituency those are the figures for a single day.

The number of packages handled by the Verwoerdburg post office during the 1977-’78 financial year was 30 444. In the 1980-’81 financial year the figure was 56 000. Of these packages, 31 900 were stored behind the counters for handing over over the counter. The space available for the storing of these packages is extremely limited, with the result that packages often have to be stored everywhere in the passages of the post office.

The postal revenue for the 1977-78 financial year was R59 000. In the 1980-’81 financial year this figure rose to R97 460. In this regard I should also like to point out that only three service points are available for handling these transactions. Due to this state of affairs it is inevitable that there have to be long queues of people waiting to be served. I receive complaints about this matter, and the local postmaster does too. The number of letters posted for outgoing sorting was 1 320 000 during the 1977-78 financial year. In 1980-’81 financial year this number had doubled to 2 566 000. The space in which these articles have to be handled and in which a considerable number of staff have to be present to do the work, is small and comprises a mere 44 sq. metres. 967 mail bags are handled by that section every week.

In conclusion, I want to refer to what is possibly the major bottleneck at the Verwoerdburg post office. It is the question of postal delivery. To illustrate the extent of the work in this section I want to point out that during May 1981 a total of 75 600 articles, of mail that had to be delivered to a total of 27 100 delivery points, was handled by this section every week. In order to do this, a distance of altogether 1 710 kilometres was travelled. During March and April this year, when we gave the Progs and the HNP in Verwoerdburg such an unforgettable thrashing, far more articles of mail were handled, because thousands of articles of election mail had also to be handled. Seventeen postmen work in this section and they have to do their work in a small space comprising 43 sq. metres. Moreover, 24 sorting racks have been added in that small space.

This tremendous work load is disposed of under very difficult circumstances and with the greatest efficiency by the postmaster, Mr. Johan Minnaar, and his team of 16 clerks and 30 uniform staff. Under the greatest pressure they are always friendly and the postmaster is always prepared and at hand to be of assistance to our people there. I am convinced that if the postmaster and his staff did not display the ability to remain calm at all times and do their work to the best of their ability, there would be greater dissatisfaction about this matter. They therefore deserve the thanks and appreciation of all our people. As I have already said, urgent relief is necessary. At present Verwoerdburg has 45 000 inhabitants and is growing at approximately 12% per annum. In 1980 alone, 760 new dwellings were built in the area. In the light of these facts I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether it would not be possible to afford urgent relief in order to alleviate this situation.

Mr. Chairman, like the hon. member for Verwoerdburg I should like to speak to the hon. the Minister about a specific problem. I am sure the hon. the Minister is aware of the problems that we are having in my constituency of Durban North. However, so that there is no misunderstanding as to the urgency and the necessity for improvements in Durban North, I should like to discuss the matter with the hon. the Minister here today. I am not sure when last the hon. the Minister was in Durban North, but I am sure that if he had been there recently, he would have been told by the officials there that Durban North is probably one of the most popular post office’s when it comes to the purchasing of defence bonds and bonus bonds. It is almost legion today that in the case of the bonus bonds certainly the big prizes were originally won by Durban North. I do not know whether there is any kind of discrimination against us now, but recently we have not won so many.

How much did you win?

I have not yet won anything. I should like to tell the hon. the Minister that if he looks at the records he will see that Durban North residents have invested literally millions of rands in defence bonds, which is another indication of the commitment which the residents of Durban North feel towards their country, the protection of our country and for providing money for the armed services of our country. I should like to tell the hon. the Minister that, despite the popularity of defence bonds, the post office facilities in Durban North are totally inadequate. They are absolutely and totally inadequate. It does not matter how hard staff there try—and they are trying their best; they are working their fingers to the bone—the facilities are so inadequate there that it is almost impossible to provide an adequate postal service. The building is too small; it is as simple as that. It cannot house the post office’s own facilities properly, let alone accommodating the customers that use that post office. I should like to tell the hon. the Minister that I am very disappointed indeed that no provision has been made in the budget this year for any type of improvement to the Durban North post office. I should like specifically to point out to the hon. the Minister that I am talking about the Durban North post office, not the Riverside one, which is further down in Athlone, nor the Glenashley one, despite the fact that those two also fall in my constituency. I should like to tell the hon. the Minister that things are so bad in that post office as far as facilities are concerned that the posting box, where one has to post one’s letters, is at the top of a 8 foot embankment. One has to climb the embankment onto the road at the top to try to post one’s letters.

Is there only one?

There is only one.

Are there no others in the district?

No. We have been asking for one for years. The nearest one is down at Broadway, two blocks away. There are some rudimentary steps up this 8 foot embankment, and having climbed these steps one gets to the post box which is standing right next to the tarmac out in the open. We have quite a number of elderly residents in Durban North and of course they have extreme difficulty in climbing the embankment in order to get to the post box. The post office in Durban North serves a minimum of 20 000 people. Those are the Whites who live in Durban North, but because we have a multi-racial post office—which we welcome—the hon. the Minister will find that this post office also serves a greater area than just Durban North. If the hon. the Minister pays a visit to Durban North, he will discover that on most occasions the staff are only able to operate two service windows and that the queues literally go out onto the pavement and into the street. On many occasions one has to stand out in the rain before one can even get into the post office to be served.

I should also like to point out to the hon. the Minister that the public telephones provided in that area—and public telephones are very important to a large section of the population—are housed in this very small post office hall. It is one of the new fandangled ones. There is no cubicle. There is just a sort of glass fibre shell which looks quite attractive with lots of post office advertisements on its sides, but functionally it is unfortunately totally impossible to use the telephones, for the simple reason that the two telephone boxes are right in the hallway. It is impossible in the first instance to have a private telephone discussion there because every person in the post office can hear what one is saying and, in the second instance, it is very difficult for the person making the telephone call to hear what the other person is saying because of the hubbub of the crowd inside.

I should also like to tell the hon. the Minister that the number of private post-boxes is totally inadequate and this, of course, relates to the fact that the premises, the building itself, is totally inadequate in size and there is no room for expansion. The hon. the Minister will also notice that no provision at all has been made for expansion or improvement at the post office in Durban North. The closest we can get to this is an amount of R170 000 that has been appropriated for post office extensions at Red Hill in Durban. I should like to say to the hon. the Minister that although that is part of my constituency it is in fact geographically separated from Durban North by a ridge and therefore serves a totally different part of the constituency.

I should also like to say to the hon. the Minister that he should have inquiries made in regard to the ownership of the land behind the post office. I am not sure whether the premises belong to the Post Office or whether they are rented. However, the position is going to deteriorate as we go along. You see, Sir, Durban North is a very popular area because it has a very excellent party representing the constituents there. [Interjections.] Because of this tremendous popularity, of course, there is high density growth taking place in Durban North. There are a number of maisonettes being built down towards the beach front and I want to assure the hon. the Minister that because of all these factors the position is going to deteriorate. It will certainly not improve. The demand for postal services is going to increase quite considerably. I hope the hon. the Minister will be able to tell us later whether those premises are owned by the Post Office or whether they are leased. If the Post Office owns the premises, then I think it should investigate the vacant ground behind the post office building to see whether that land cannot be acquired. I think it is high time that we doubled up on the size of the post office. When one is serving a community of something above 20 000 people the hon. the Minister will appreciate that one needs adequate facilities to do so. I should like to issue an invitation to the hon. the Minister. If he has not been down that way recently, perhaps he might care to pay us a visit during this session or after the session. It will be a pleasure for us to show the hon. the Minister around that constituency.

You will not be able to enter the post office together.

Well, then, we shall have to go in singly. We shall go in one at a time and when we have inspected the post office we shall show the hon. the Minister what Durban North looks like. I should also like to mention to the hon. the Minister that I shall unfortunately not be here when he replies this afternoon because of Select Committee work. However, my hon. colleagues have assured me that they will take down word for word what the hon. the Minister says when he replies regarding Durban North.

I should also like to put two questions to the hon. the Minister concerning the savings facilities and philately. In regard to the savings service one notices that investments by the public in the Post Office Savings Bank are growing considerably. I should like to know whether the hon. the Minister has ever considered the appointment of agencies in the popular hypermarkets or supermarkets. On many occasions people require their money at very short notice while they are out shopping. When they visit these large shopping complexes they find it difficult to use the money that they have in their Post Office savings account because they have to traipse all the way to the nearest post office to draw money before they can spend it at these large shopping complexes. Perhaps the hon. the Minister will investigate the possibility of doing what the building societies do and that is installing these electromechanical machines that dispense money on the production of an identity card. I think that would make the Post Office Savings Bank a great deal more popular than it is at the moment because then people would have ready access to points where they could draw their money without having to go to a post office.

Finally, I should like to tell the hon. the Minister that I believe that the philatelic service should not only be administered at the main post office in Durban. This service could be extended to the main branches around Durban. For instance, in Durban North itself there is a very great interest in the philatelic service provided by the Post Office but if one wishes to buy a single first-day cover one has to travel into Durban itself to the main post office, one has to hunt for parking there and will probably have to spend R5 on petrol and parking facilities, apart from the frustration, in order to obtain one first-day cover. Perhaps the hon. the Minister will consider the possibility of expanding this service to the main suburban post offices as well.

When the hon. the Minister comes to Durban North, as I hope he will, we will also give him a flower for his button-hole.

A “stinkblaar”!

It will not be a disä but it will be our Natal flower. We shall keep that as a surprise for the hon. the Minister.

Mr. Chairman, before he resumed his seat, the hon. member for Durban North brought a few matters to the attention of the hon. the Minister. I think he has a strong case as far as the post office in Durban North is concerned, and if I know the hon. the Minister, I think his appeal will be attended to. The hon. member also brought other matters to the attention of the hon. the Minister and I believe that those, too, will be considered in due course.

My real reason for rising to speak is that I want to say on this occasion that to enable us to evaluate the enormous achievements of this department properly, we must take into account the fact that the department has to serve a population of 23,6 million, which is distributed throughout an area bigger than Germany, France, Italy and Portugal combined. We must also take into account the fact that our country and its people has undergone tremendous developments over the past decade. As a result, very heavy demands are being made on the department. When one takes all this into account, one realizes of what value the department, its people and functions are to us.

One writer has said that the ’eighties will be a decade of challenge and opportunities in various spheres for South Africa. I think that this applies to this department as well, the more so because one can say without hesitation that the department is at all times abreast of technological developments. Because this is so I want to take this opportunity to refer to just a few of these technological developments.

In the first place, there is the well-known telephone conference facility. As we know, the development of this has already been completed and the first apparatus has already been installed in Pretoria on an experimental basis. Our businessmen and industrialists can now make use of this modem facility. Up to six people in possession of an automatic telephone system can confer with one another without much waste of time and without expenditure on travelling costs and so on. This is a tremendous asset in view of the times we are living in. I believe that our businessmen and industrialists will make use of this facility in future years.

In the second place, there is the modernization of our telex network due to the installation of electronic EDS exchanges. What one takes into consideration in this regard is the reduction in the number of termini, what the functions of the terminal operator will involve in comparison with those of his predecessor, and how much more functional this system will be in the years that lie ahead, and when one considers these things one realizes afresh that this department has kept pace with technological developments.

In the final instance in this regard I want to refer to the installation of electronic exchanges in order to deal with the tremendous demand for telephone services. The hon. the Minister has already pointed out that use will be made of the German/French developed system, but what I want to stress are the consequences of this tremendous development for our telecommunications services. What do we find when we consider this? We find that the installation costs, calculated on the basis of time and labour, will be reduced considerably. We find that 40% less floor space will be required. The purchase price will be approximately 20% less. The exchange will be so much more functional. For the consumer, too, the cost will be so much less. I repeat that the department has succeeded in keeping up with really important technological developments in this field in South Africa and elsewhere in the world.

However, that is not all. The hon. the Minister and his officials have also kept up with the things that really matter in the department. In this regard, too, I want to mention a few examples. Let us consider the effort at decentralization. If one wants to have a successful business enterprise one has to take two important factors into account, viz. labour and infrastructure. Where the infrastructure is lacking, one creates it. What are the hon. the Minister and the Post Office doing? They are considering this and are beginning to decentralize sporadically, because our northern metropolises have developed tremendously—a fact that we cannot get away from and of which we ought really to be proud. However, the infrastructure cannot always carry this development, and as far as the Post Office is concerned, due to the shortage of housing it is difficult to obtain the necessary staff in those metropolises. The Post Office has however decided to decentralize so that certain functions may be performed in other metropolises, places where, due to the infrastructure, housing, and therefore labour, are more readily available. I can assure the hon. the Minister that I welcome this step since certain Post Office audit functions are being transferred to our city. I can also give him the assurance that the key group from head office will be able to rely on the people of our city for the necessary staff, and that we shall make them happy in our midst.

In the course of this debate over the past day and a half a great deal of stress has been laid on the shortage of telephones. However, it would be an evil day for South Africa if we were able to deal with all the applications for telephones in the midst of the development that is taking place in our country, because that would suggest stagnation, and there could be no further development. Wherever development takes place in the world, there is a shortage of telephones. I do not want to repeat the figures provided by the hon. the Minister but I do want to refer to the history of our telephone service. It took 25 years before the first million telephones were installed in South Africa. After another 11 years the second million telephones were installed, and after another six years the 3rd millionth telephone was installed, and this gratifying and fine function took place in our city. I want to thank the hon. the Minister for having chosen our city and for the fact that some of my colleagues and I were able to attend that function. I believe that this was a special event for South Africa and all our people. This relatively young country was able to hand over the 3rd millionth telephone to a new consumer on 13 August this year. I congratulate the hon. the Minister and his department on this major achievement.

The third matter to which I want to refer concerns steps one has to take to ensure a happy labour force. To make one’s labour force happy, one has to be able to offer decent conditions of service, and housing as well, and a great deal has been said on this score. Over the past weeks, mention has been made in this House of the fact that it has now become of the utmost importance that the employer should set his shoulder to the wheel and help provide his employees with housing. The time is past when one could say that the State alone should provide housing for all the Whites, Coloureds, Asians and all the Black people. If we were to adopt that point of departure then the State would never be able to perform the task and we should be following the wrong direction. Last year the hon. the Minister set a fine example to the private sector, but if this sector does not realize that it should also see to proper housing for its employees, then we shall not succeed in our effort to ensure housing for all our people. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, I should like to raise a number of matters with the hon. the Minister. Firstly, I should like to refer to an item appearing on page 46 of the annual report. The item refers to the fact that in terms of section 17(5)(a) of the Post Office Service Act 619 women officers of the Post Office were, in the period 1979-’80, allowed to remain in the service of the Post Office in a permanent capacity after their marriage. It struck me as rather strange that the 619 women should have been treated in this way, and so I looked up the relevant section in the Act, which states—

I wish to put it to the hon. the Minister that this is an archaic provision. It is high time that this is scrapped from the Statute Book. If the hon. the Minister does not agree to scrapping this provision, let me challenge him to explain exactly why it is that a woman should face automatic dismissal just because she gets married. It does not happen to a man, so why should it happen to a woman? I think it is quite wrong that women employees—and thousands upon thousands of the 75 000 employees of the Post Office are certainly women—should have this sword of Damocles hanging over their heads through being compelled to forfeit their jobs simply by virtue of becoming married. That is not the way to encourage family life. It is certainly not conducive to the full and productive use of our labour force, particularly at a time when the Post Office is struggling for manpower. It will not be enough for the hon. the Minister to say that the Board and he himself are lenient in the application of this section. That will certainly not be good enough. The point is that marriage as such should not be seen to be a penalty, or in any way a reason for changing the work status of an officer of the Post Office who just happens to be female. It does not matter how lenient the board might be in exercising its discretion, no person should face such potential penalties.

There is, however, another section that is equally disturbing. Section 17(5)(b) states—

This provision, therefore, actually provides for demotion in consequence of her marriage. Once again let me say that that provision should be scrapped forthwith. Both these provisions discriminate on the basis of sex, and that is completely unacceptable to the PFP.

MCP legislation.

Another question I should like to raise with the hon. the Minister is the question of emergency telephones on highways. This is a common feature on overseas highways, but we do not have them in South Africa. I would certainly like to know why. There is no such facility, for example, on Settlers’ Way in Cape Town. I happen to have had the most unpleasant experience of having had my car break down on Settlers’ Way in the middle of a dark night. Perhaps the hon. the Minister could use his imagination to conjure up how unfortunate an experience that can be. Once one’s car has broken down on Settlers’ Way on a dark night there is no way of calling for help, except by walking from one’s car to areas that rate amongst the most crimeridden areas in the country, or else one has to wait at the car and hitch a lift, and there are not many people who would pick up a person on a dark night on Settlers’ Way. As since the hon. the Minister stated in his speech that he intends to introduce vandal-proof public telephones, that he will use those vandal-proof public telephones on our main public highways, particularly in the densely-populated urban areas.

A third point I should like to raise with the hon. the Minister is the question of post-boxes. I noticed in the report that during the period 1976-’77 to 1977-’78 the Post Office installed 37 433 new post-boxes. That was some four years ago. But during the latest period reflected in this report, only one-third of that number were put into operation, viz. 11 489. This is a reflection of a trend because during the previous year 12 400 post-boxes were installed. I would say this is an unhappy trend if we are installing fewer and fewer post-boxes at our post offices. I would like an explanation as to why this is so.

The hon. the Minister lent his support to the idea of using post-boxes more often, but in the specific case of Constantia I should like to raise a matter which is important to my constituency. As the hon. the Minister will know, Constantia is a growing area. During the past five years the number of houses has increased from 2 355 to 3 099. That represents an increase of 31,5% in the number of houses in Constantia. It must be borne in mind that Constantia is an area which is ideal for the use of post-boxes because this saves postmen having to cover very large distances over rural roads where the houses are sparsely situated. It is a good area for post-boxes but during that period the number of post-boxes increased from 200 to 250. That simply is not enough. This is no reflection on the local Postmaster. I have the highest regard for him. He is a charming man and is popular in the area. The problem is that the post office is too small and there is no more room where boxes can be put even though they are required. My appeal to the hon. the Minister is whether he can please make arrangements for more postal facilities for Constantia. A local shopping centre is being planned and will be opened within the next 18 months or two years and I hope the department will take steps to acquire larger premises on a rental basis in that new complex. If the department does so, could provision please be made for some 500 to 600 post-boxes? It suits the area and will be an important service to relieve a bottleneck which has developed in Constantia.

On the subject of post-boxes generally I should like to make an extra appeal, and that is that there is a gap right here in Cape Town in close proximity to Parliament. Stal Plein Post Office is an obvious place to have some post-boxes, but there are none. A number of businesses in the area suffer as a result of that. Perhaps the hon. the Minister can look at that point too.

The final point I should like to make while I am on my feet is that I would like to welcome the department’s having brought part of the Post Office establishment to Cape Town. In the report it is indicated that a portion of Saponet is now established here in the Cape and I wish to congratulate the hon. the Minister on that and thank him. The Western Cape desperately needs whatever it can get in the way of extra jobs. I should like to support the suggestion that we also get a part of Potelin in the Western Cape.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Hillbrow amazes me every time he speaks in this House. I thought he was the only man who did not display much initiative in the commission, but now I have found that he has a team mate in the hon. member for Constantia. I am amazed that the hon. member for Constantia and the hon. member for Hillbrow directly contradict one another. The hon. member for Hillbrow asked why there had been a slowdown in the supply of telephones, and why there was a backlog. Then the hon. member for Constantia asked the hon. the Minister whether he could not install telephones along all the freeways, about every few hundred kilometres or every 20 km—I do not know how far apart he wants them. 215 more telephones per day were installed last year than in the previous year. Therefore provision is being made for additional telephones. Then an hon. member comes along and asks us for things like that. I think the hon. Minister should promise us that when the video-telephone is installed, he should also retain the old system, because if I phoned a member of the Opposition I should prefer not to see him as well.

Before going further I want to convey my thanks and appreciation to the department and its officials for the outstanding service they rendered us during the election campaign. I do not believe there is any party who does not agree with me in this connection. During the election campaign 520 telephones were installed on the East Rand, all of which gave trouble-free service. I believe that in future we are going to make use of telephones on a far larger scale during election campaigns. I look forward to the day when we South Africans will be able to vote by means of some electronic apparatus. This is going to become essential when we count the votes for the NP in future. However, we can continue to count the Opposition votes by hand. [Interjections.]

I was also gratified to hear that the Minister and his department are going to vote money for a feasibility study as regards the utilization of electrical motor vehicles. Approximately R150 000 is not asking too much to help put South Africa ahead in this field. I believe this is necessary and this side of the House will definitely support it. I believe that in this regard, too, the Post Office is doing pioneering work in South Africa. The Post Office is also faithful to its policy of co-operation with the private sector as far as the electrical vehicles project is concerned. This is being done in co-operation with the private sector and the CSIR, and we hope that it will succeed.

South Africa’s electronic industry is supported to such an extent by the Post Office as to enable it to compete on the world market. Not only is the Post Office improving the quality of its communication systems thereby, it is also strengthening this industry which provides the private sector with the apparatus whereby to utilize those systems to the full. The modernization of our communication systems has resulted in the commercial world being provided with electronic equipment which saves manpower, money and time. We see how the systems of the Post Office are bringing new life to every section of the commercial world and the economy.

Because this department has come such a long way with the electronics industry I want to raise a matter to which I hope the hon. the Minister will be able to give attention. I believe that it will be in the interests of the Post Office and of South Africa. I believe the time has come for us to create a body which will have to report at a high level on whether this industry is growing as it should in South Africa, whether it should be strengthened and whether it should be developed over a broader field. In this space age we are living in, it is important that we should have a dynamic electronics industry. Without such an industry, a country such as ours is vulnerable—economically vulnerable, militarily vulnerable and strategically vulnerable. If we had not been as self-sufficient as we are at the moment, this Government would certainly have been in a difficult negotiating position. A country without its own electronic industry, lags behind in virtually every field of life, and struggles to progress in the technological sphere. Electronic apparatus plays a role in the growth of every industrial sector in our country. This kind of equipment is replacing more and more parts and systems due to their low cost, their low maintenance cost and their more efficient operation. One need only compare the price and the operation of the old Westclox Zobo—which one had to wind up regularly —with today’s wristwatch. Compare, too, the microwave oven of today with yesterday’s coal stove, and compare the portable radio of today with the clumsy affair of 30 years ago. If, therefore, South Africa wants to compete on the same level with the foremost industrial countries of the world, then its industries will have to be supported by a strong electronic capability. Money must be spent fearlessly on research in this connection which can be undertaken by trained workers within this country, people who will have to keep abreast of the latest developments at all times.

South Africa’s present favourable position as regards telecommunications is due to the fact that the Post Office, together with Armscor and the SABC, as well as various other bodies, have strongly supported the domestic electronics industry, and have seen to it that it became self-sufficient. In order to develop this industry further it is necessary for attention to be given to the training of staff and particularly to a large number of components that are still imported, components which should rather be manufactured domestically.

I could mention a long list of components which I believe we could manufacture in this country and which would be to the benefit of the industry in question. By affording this additional support to the domestic industry we should enable it to produce on a larger scale and, by so doing, to reduce its costs. In this way it could also be in a better bargaining position as regards marketing. This would also create and ensure new employment opportunities for South Africans and would place us among the world leaders in the field of telecommunications. It would keep us there too.

Telecommunications plays a tremendously important role in the security of a country as we experienced afresh in Angola last week. Accountability for South Africa’s communications system and therefore our progress, too, rests on the shoulders of this hon. Minister and of his department. At the one end of the spectrum of his department there is the letter which is written, perhaps on a farm, and is delivered to the border weeks later. At the other end of the spectrum we already see on the horizon the video conference held simultaneously in Pretoria and New York between the hon. the Minister of Foreign Affairs and perhaps Gen. Haig of the USA. Therefore, between these two extremes the Post Office eliminates the transportation of people, conveys information and saves time and money. To be able to achieve this degree of sophistication, the Post Office had necessarily to co-operate very closely with the private sector over the past decade. In this regard, too, the Post Office has taken the lead and shown that unity is strength. This makes of it a world leader in the field of posts and communications. It also makes world leaders of our manufacturers.

In the annual Post Office debate we have so often found that “first in the world by the Post Office” has no longer been as pleasant as “the first first” of the Post Office. [Time expired.]

Mr. Chairman, it must have been a matter of mental telepathy, because my first note in front of me reads: “Thank election telephone staff.” This indicates that the hon. member for Boksburg and I are on the same wavelength. I can only say that if all sectors received the same sort of service that we enjoyed in Durban from the special officials who dealt with election telephones, they were very lucky people, because we received excellent service, excellent courtesy and attention and tremendous efficiency in all our requirements both during the election campaign in our offices, and on election day at the polling booths. Therefore, I should like to express our appreciation for that.

In the five minutes I have available to me I want to make a plea that affects tens of thousands of young men. I want to make a plea for more and better public telephone facilities in military camps. We have 30 000 plus young men going into camp every year and in many of these camps the public telephone facilities are totally and hopelessly inadequate. In one particular area at Voortrekkerhoogte, where there are two camps adjoining, they have between them four public telephones serving 1 100 national servicemen. They queue up and eventually when their turn comes they very often find one or more of the telephones out of order. By the time they get there the coin boxes are full and the telephones are not operating any more because they simply cannot cope with the volume of people trying to ’phone home. It is understandable that where many of these young men are away from home for the first time they want to take the opportunity to ’phone either their mothers or their girlfriends. If it is the mothers it is always reverse charge calls; one can be sure of that! Perhaps the parents would like me to plead for fewer telephones because then there would be fewer reverse charges! Nonetheless this is a problem in virtually all military camps. I believe that we must give the best possible service to these national servicemen. I know there are other claims in regard to the need for public call boxes but this is an area where there is no alternative. Very often a serviceman will find that he gets an unexpected weekend off. He cannot plan his weekends in advance because this depends on all sorts of military factors. Sometimes, however, he finds that he can get a weekend off to perhaps fly home, but he literally cannot get to a telephone to telephone his parents to tell them that he is coming home. Perhaps he wants them to meet him at the airport, to telegraph him money or whatever the case may be. I believe we owe it to these young men to make sure that at least while they are at base camps where they can communicate they do have the facilities to do so. How much a telephone means to these men is apparent when one goes to some of the bush camps in the operational area. In almost every camp one will find a tin can with a bit of string tied to it, a little money box, a sign indicating that it is a telephone and a big “out of order” sign on the front of it. That is how much they think of a telephone service even when it is not possible to provide it. I want therefore to ask the hon. the Minister to pay attention to this particular matter, to inquire from the military authorities just where the shortages are most acute and to try to meet their needs.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Durban Point made a plea which I believe is a valid one and I trust the hon. the Minister will give attention to it. I believe that the necessity for our young people to communicate with their homes is also of importance to this side of the House.

Communication has always been of cardinal importance to the orderly existence of a community. I believe it will continue to be of cardinal importance in the future. In the past the beating of the drum carried a message of peace or war, happiness or despair, over long distances. This drum has been replaced by today’s very sophisticated electronic apparatus. I venture to say that nowadays human beings and communication are synonymous. I find it difficult to envisage human beings without communication of some nature or some kind of order. In this connection the Post Office has always played a very important role in South Africa and I believe in other communities as well. In South Africa the Post Office frequently began as the focal point of a community from which that community then grew. From this focal point grew new infrastructures such as shops, and then towns developed which later grew into cities. This is still the case today and the community I come from, Springs, does not differ at all from this pattern. The post office building in Springs has been the communication centre of that town for the past five decades or so and in the process it has become the focal point of the community. From here the communication waves spread out to the community and it is still one of the meeting places of the community. The aged fetch their monthly pensions there, ladies selling stamps for some charity organization are there and we find that this post office is playing an increasingly important role in the community. We also encounter another phenomenon, namely that the services supplied by the Post Office are now much more comprehensive than they were a few years ago. They have expanded and become considerably more diverse. I just want to point out that the accommodation in this post office no longer meets the requirements for the services it has to make available to the public. The facilities available are at present used to their fullest extent. About 1,6 million postal articles are handled every month and there is no further extension which can be used to enable the existing staff to give the public a more orderly and better service. I just want to say that Mr. Jacobs, the postmaster in Springs, and his staff most definitely deserve the thanks of our community for the way in which they serve the community. As may, in my opinion, be expected of a postmaster, he also plays a leading role in the community and he is a respected person in the community.

Having said this, it gives me great pleasure to say that I see in the budget that an amount of R2 million has been set aside for a new post office in Springs. I do not want to say to the hon. Minister what a member elsewhere once said to the MEC. He said: “It is of no use to me that the school is in the budget. I want it in Cullinan!” As regards Springs, we also want to tell the hon. the Minister that we should like the post office in Springs. We are very grateful that matters have progressed so far that it now appears in the budget and we are looking forward to having this new post office in our community where it will again be a focal point of the community and of communications. I also just want to mention in passing that an exchange is also to be built in Kwathema. Money has also been set aside for this. The Black people of Springs have also become very aware of the use of the telephone and I am also grateful that the Post Office has begun taking the necessary steps in this regard.

I believe that we on the East Rand are happy with the sort of service we enjoy from the technical division of the Post Office in particular. I should also like to emphasize here today that the sort of service we enjoy is of an extremely professional and very efficient nature. One does not see letters about telephone services in the letter columns of the newspapers every day. When one sees a letter in a column it frequently represents the opinion of a few thousand people. I read the following letter in the Springs Advertiser of 28 August—

This is the sort of appreciation we on the East Rand have for the technicians and the people who must serve us.

And now a few remarks about the Post Office and the private sector. We on the East Rand are perhaps fortunate that private initiative engaged in manufacturing processes for the Post Office is very strongly represented there. I find it gratifying to see how the Post Office integrates its activities with those of the private sector. Supply agreements involving contracts totalling approximately R5 billion for the next 15 years has been entered into recently. This very positive action of the Post Office naturally means that the consumer makes certain demands of the manufacturing industry. This of course also leads to a larger turnover, which in turn means that employment is provided to many people, from the highly trained engineer to the man performing the simplest task on the telephone assembly line.

This assembly line in Springs is really worth seeing. The hon. member who just mentioned the 3 millionth telephone must bear in mind that this may not have been possible if it had not been for that assembly line. It is a sight worth seeing to see telephones being assembled at a rate of one a minute. Every minute a telephone is supplied to be made available somewhere in the country.

This is an extremely strategic industry. The fact that the Post Office accords a very high priority to local content and that the industry in South Africa has progressed to a very high degree of sophistication means that we in South Africa will in the future be almost entirely independent, as we are now. I wish to emphasize that the policy of the Post Office of integrating its activities and those of the private sector in regard to the provision of apparatus, is extremely sound. In the future it can also further enhance the effectiveness of the Post Office.

Mr. Chairman, at this late stage in the debate, with the hon. the Minister having been roundly praised by one side of the House and roundly damned by the other side, events seem to have run true to form, and there seems to be very little left in it. I am therefore going to do what one experienced parliamentarian advised me to do under such circumstances and that is to make a pitch for the farmers.

In particular I should like to deal with some of the telecommunications systems and devices which are open to the agricultural sector, and which could perhaps be improved upon, or else expanded, in order to provide better services for the agricultural sector. Farmers, unlike other businessmen, are isolated, and therefore it is most import ant that the communication systems available to them work efficiently.

The most important system available is obviously the telephone. Here I should like to refer to a topic which was given an airing earlier this year. I think it was the hon. member for Umhlanga who made a plea for the old party-line system to be replaced. I want to endorse what the hon. member had to say about the party line. In reply to that debate the hon. the Minister described the new excellent SOR 18 system which his department developed and which would replace the party-line system. Unfortunately the hon. the Minister did not make mention when this was going to take place.

I therefore tabled a question earlier this session with regard to the replacement of this old system. The hon. the Minister then told us that there were in fact 776 manual exchanges still in existence in the country and that he was hoping to phase them out by the year 1994. That is the target which was set. We appreciate this, but what rather worries us is that the hon. the Minister mentioned earlier in this debate that during the past year 21 manual exchanges had been phased out. In the official report the number is given as 25 and so it would appear as if 20 to 25 had been phased out.

That was in the previous year.

Well, this appears to be about the average, and at this rate it seems as though it will be a great deal later than 1994 before the old antiquated systems are all phased out, and this is what I am concerned about. I am therefore asking the hon. the Minister to try to phase these exchanges out according to his schedule.

The introduction of these automatic SOR-systems is going to mark the end of another South African institution, and that is the rural exchange operator. What a wonderful service has been rendered to the people of South Africa by these operators! Many people have enjoyed the popular television programme “Nommer Asseblief’, but I am sure that volumes could still be written about some of the legendary characters who have operated our rural exchanges. I, for one, will be sad when my old friends on the Adelaide exchange who have given cheerful and efficient service for so many years, are phased out by an impersonal machine. I am sure that everybody will agree with me when I say that I hope that these people will either be happily accommodated in other sections of the Post Office or else enjoy a well-earned retirement.

I can foresee the modern telecommunications system playing an ever-increasing role in agriculture. I am sure that most farmers are not yet aware of the kinds of service which exist and which I hope will be made available to them in an ever-increasing degree in the future. Here I am thinking of the particular systems that are already in limited operation, for instance the record-keeping system whereby a farmer can link up his farm with a central computer. This helps him to process all kinds of data and it also supplies him with useful information. It is interesting to know that the new pushbutton telephone that has been introduced will assist in the transmission of that data and will therefore fit in very well.

A device which I am surprised farmers have not made more use of is the automatic phone-answering gadget. This could be a great help especially where farmers’ wives are perhaps working. It is most frustrating trying to get hold of farmers during the day, as I am sure many people have experienced.

Another more sophisticated innovation which will probably find more favour with farmers is the telephone which fits into one’s motorcar, or bakkie.

Or even one’s tractor.

This device is enjoying enormous popularity in the USA where many farmers have their telephones in their bakkies. In my view this is the ultimate luxury in farming, not just because it will be very useful if one’s bakkie runs out of petrol five miles from home in a thunderstorm but also in terms of security. I am sure that this system could be a valuable aid to civil defence programmes in many parts of the country, particularly in those parts where difficulties with the citizen band radio system are encountered.

I hope that when the hon. the Minister’s department considers the further planning and promotion of the services under its control, the agricultural sector will come in for due consideration and that these services will be made readily available to them. I also hope that the farming community will in turn support the department.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Albany made a positive speech and I feel sure the hon. the Minister will answer it satisfactorily. I should like to thank the hon. the Minister and his department for tabling a very interesting report. I should also like to refer to a few local matters, and in the first instance to our newly retired Postmaster at Roodepoort, Mr. Izak Coetzee, who served the community in a positive way for many years, for which we as a community are very grateful. He made a contribution in the cultural and many other fields. We hope our new postmaster, Mr. Jonker, will be happy there and that he will enjoy his stay in Roodepoort. To return to Mr. Coetzee, in spite of the sturdy old building housing the post office at Roodepoort, in the recent competition for decorating, neatness, security, etc. of post offices, under Mr. Coetzee’s guidance this post office came second in the highest division of post office classes. This brings me to local needs. There is a need for a few hundred extra postboxes, a matter that is already receiving attention. I trust it will be possible for them, too, to be installed soon. There is also the question of the installation of a local telex exchange at Wilropark. Attention to this matter will also be greatly appreciated.

This brings me to an aspect which has been brought to the attention of the Director of Philately Services before, viz. in July 1980. I refer to the possibility of special postage stamps and first-day covers to celebrate the hundredth anniversary of the discovery of gold in Roodepoort. An interesting piece of history is attached to this.

The hundredth year after the discovery of the first gold on the Witwatersrand, in Roodepoort, is to be commemorated in 1984. The Confidence reef was discovered by Fred Struben on 18 September 1884. Gold was discovered on the farms Roodepoort, Volstruisfontein and Paardekraal, which today still form part of the city of Roodepoort. That discovery led directly to the discovery of the Johannesburg goldfields. Accordingly Roodepoort is recognized as the cradle of the Witwatersrand goldfields. In order to commemorate this occasion in a suitable way application was made by the town clerk at the instance of the city council of Roodepoort, to make available an issue of a special commemorative stamp or stamps and first-day covers, with the Roodepoort postmark, during September 1984. I respectfully suggest that the issue of a special commemorative stamp and the accompanying first-day covers be made available on 18 September 1984. This is justified by the extremely important role which gold has played in the South African economy, as well as the fact that Roodepoort is considered the cradle of the goldfields of the Witwatersrand. It will be appreciated if the hon. the Minister would give serious consideration to this and if he could perhaps give us an answer in this connection.

There is a further aspect in connection with my constituency concerning which I should like to address this House. Unfortunately it will probably not receive attention this year. This year Roodepoort is hosting the first international eisteddfod, and this is to take place in October. It will be an annual event of international quality and it would be appreciated if the hon. the Minister and his department could consider issuing a stamp in this connection in the future. I shall also submit a written request in due course.

I should also like to refer to the report tabled by the Postmaster-General. On pages 80 and 81 reference is made to the vehicle records. In more than one regard this makes very interesting reading. The number of motor vehicles in service at 31 March 1980 was 11 832. Those vehicles covered 127 253 million kilometres. The average distance covered by each vehicle was 10 323 at an average cost of 12,4 cents per kilometre. It is also interesting to note that about 2 084 accidents took place. This figure is equal to about 20% of the number of motor vehicles used. At first glance this seems a fairly high figure, and I should like to hear the hon. the Minister’s opinion in this connection. One should, however, also consider the distance covered without an accident. This distance is given as 62 839 km. A remark in this regard could perhaps give more information.

Let us also consider the full-time staff during the period under review. There were 74 398 staff members in the full-time employ of the Post Office. On page 46 of the report only 30 cases of disciplinary steps taken against Post Office staff members were mentioned. This is an excellent record. It attests to the high quality of the officials of the Post Office.

On page 3 of the Auditor-General’s report for the same period, mention is made of a little over R2 000 in respect of free telephone services to institutions for the blind and persons with limited vision for training purposes. What is the criterion in this connection for such institutions and/or persons? To what extent are these institutions aware that such services are in fact available? A statement by the hon. Minister in this connection will be interesting. If we look at page 4 of the Auditor-General’s report we see that mention is made of an amount of R1 861 816 written off in respect of 32 405 unpaid telephone accounts. The question arises as to whether consideration should not be given to taking deposits from telephone subscribers in order to diminish this sort of loss.

In conclusion I should like to express my appreciation for a very interesting magazine, namely the Post Office newspaper Postel. I like to read the magazine because it is very interesting. It is interesting to note that R5 002 is received for advertisements. When one considers the magazine and the cost involved, one wonders whether consideration should not be given to a larger format and more pages in the magazine. On average there are two advertisements of large format in the magazine. The magazine has a minimum readership of 75 000, and I respectfully suggest that the magazine could successfully be offered to advertisers on a wider level.

Mr. Chairman, one is conscious of the important role that the Department of Posts and Telecommunications is playing in maintaining an efficient system of communication right throughout the country. One is also very much appreciative of the fact that the postal tariffs in this country are amongst the lowest in the world. During the course of this debate we have heard a great deal about improvement of all services, particularly during the past few years. The emphasis has always been more on the urban factor; so it will probably come as a considerable surprise to hon. members to learn that there are instances where there has been a complete deterioration in mail services over recent years in some rural areas. In commenting on this particular aspect, I wish to point out that one is very much aware of the important role the traditional mail coach played and also of the part it played in the historical development of a country. One is aware of the dedication and the sense of duty and pride that have been associated with an efficient mail service. One is equally aware of the significance of this form of sound communication system as a means of determining whether a country is progressing or not. In this regard South Africa has been no exception.

A strong appreciation of the value of efficient postal and telephone services is particularly significant in the rural areas, so much so that there are those of us who recall the days, not so very long ago, when country postmen, knocking on the door of a home situated in an outlying and remote area, heralded the only form of contact with the outside world. How many of us today even bother to recall the difficult conditions under which these rural postmen operated? These were dedicated people who took pride in delivering their mail on time by horse, on foot and later by the more modem method of a bicycle. One must not forget the vagaries of the weather with which they had to contend. The point I wish to make here is that the one object these postmen had in mind was to provide a regular service to the best of their ability. Can we say that the same sense of dedication and service applies today? Amongst certain members of the postal staff I would say it does apply, but one must ask oneself whether there are cases where they are being deprived of facilities required to give effect to this sense of dedication.

I wish to draw the attention of the hon. the Minister to the deterioration of postal services to which I referred earlier. A number of small rural towns have been confronted with the position where daily postal services have been curtailed and have given way to a deplorable outgoing mail service in which, believe it or not, any mail posted after 2 p.m. on a Friday is only removed from that post office on the following Tuesday. May I ask: Is this progress?

Can you give me some particulars?

With great pleasure. I can give the hon. the Minister quite a list.

We cannot simply talk in the air, can we?

No, I shall give the hon. the Minister the details. Does he wish to have them now?

Yes, please.

This applies in Underberg, Himeville, Nottingham Road and Rosetta.

That is enough to go on with.

I wish to support the comments of the hon. member for Umhlanga regarding staff housing. This is a serious deficiency in the rural areas and it has been responsible for a reluctance on the part of postal staff to accept appointments in the rural areas.

In conclusion I would appeal to the hon. the Minister to ensure that maintenance and the improvement of services in the rural areas should receive the same high priority that it does in urban areas.

Finally, I should like to associate myself with the comment made by the hon. member for Albany in regard to postal staff and particularly the postmasters, postmistresses and operators of telephone exchanges in the country areas who play such an important role in the community and who in times of emergency are always ready to help and assist in every possible way. To them I pay homage.

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Hillbrow said to me it is no excuse for me to compare our telephone backlog with the position in comparable nations. Sir, how does one argue with a learned gentleman if he cannot follow one’s argument? When I visit overseas countries one of the very first questions normally put to me by my opposite number in every one of those countries, or to the Director-General of our country’s postal administration is normally: What is the extent of the telephone backlog in your country? The reason for this is that all those countries are in a position in which their situation can be compared with ours. The hon. member for Houghton, however, apparently wants us to compare the situation in South Africa with that in some of the Third World countries. At least that was what I deduced from the remark she made when I was discussing this issue with the hon. member for Hillbrow.

What I said is now quite irrelevant.

That attitude …

My remark is not relevant now.

If one wishes to discuss anything properly with the hon. member this is the sort of reaction one gets.

It is a red herring.

What is a red herring? [Interjections.] The hon. member said I was not justified in referring to the situation in comparable countries. I tried my best to explain the matter. If one wants a worthwhile debate, then one should conduct a proper debate instead of reacting like a child as the hon. member did.

But I told you why. Why did you not deal with the issue?

The hon. member for Hillbrow comes here with a story. He takes it amiss of me when I quote to him from the Rand Daily Mail and other newspapers what he told newsmen. He should rather have said those things in this House. Irrespective of the content of those statements, the lesson I am trying to teach the hon. member is that he should rather discuss parliamentary matters in this House. He must not display his ignorance in the public Press. [Interjections.]

Who leaked the story to Oggendbladl

There was no leak to Oggendblad or to any other newspaper. [Interjections.] I am not complaining about the fact that the hon. member said there would be no tariff increases.

So what are you complaining about then?

I am complaining about the fact that he gave the newspapers other information that was wrong.

Such as?

Mr. Chairman, do you see what I mean? How is one to hold a discussion with such a man? After I had asked him nicely to come and discuss matters with me because that would have spared him the misery of displaying his own ignorance in public, and after I had asked him to raise the matter in this House, this is what happens. When I pointed out to the hon. member a similar statement he had made in the newspapers—while he was so full of praise here today for the fact that we are going out of our way to supply housing for our staff—he said nothing further about the other story he had swallowed whole, without making inquiries, but today he came up with a totally different story about a block of flats in his constituency which we had purchased. It is clear to me that the hon. member for Hillbrow wants his bread buttered on both sides. He reproaches me for not supplying housing for our staff, but on the other hand he comes crying to me in my office in Pretoria and asks me not to evict his voters from that block of flats. We were as patient as possible. However I want to put it to that hon. member that we did not throw people out of flats.

†We did not expropriate that particular property.

You bought it.

Yes, we bought it. The hon. member used the word “expropriation”. Mr. Chairman, you are aware what that word means in terms of the relationship between the State and the individual. [Interjections.]

*This is the sort of picture which the hon. member paints here and then holds up as the truth.

But you still chased them out. You said the tenants had to get out. [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, we did not chase anyone out. The hon. member came crying to me in my office. I then told him we would be as patient as possible, but that we need housing. The fact of the matter is this: If you do something, the hon. member reproaches you, and if you do the exact opposite, he still reproaches you. [Interjections.] You know, Mr. Chairman, the hon. member reminds me of the leader of a certain nomadic group, a man named Yasser Arafat, who also operates in this way. [Interjections.] I should like to ask the member that we discuss these matters like reasonable people. We can do so if he co-operates. We gained the support of the NRP and that of some of the hon. member’s own colleagues for this today. I appreciate this. If he really wants to help with the housing effort …

It is very insensitive of you to make that sort of remark.

… he must please not play this sort of game.

It is very insensitive of you to bring Yasser Arafat into this debate. [Interjections.] You are a real racist, man. [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman … [Interjections.]

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order: …

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Yeoville, who has such a thin skin …

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order: May the hon. member for Yeoville call another hon. member a racist?

Order! The hon. the Minister may proceed.

The hon. member for Hillbrow wants to know more about the HNP affair. I do not know why this matter is so important to him and why he has raised it again. As a result of the hon. member’s request that I again give the assurance which I have already given, arising from the matter which he is using as a source, I quote again from paragraph 5.0 of the Advocate-General’s report. It reads—

Paragraph 6.0 reads—

That is why the hon. member is raising this matter here this afternoon. If the hon. member had studied the report of the Advocate-General, he could have read this for himself. However, now he wants to bandy the name of an official, who was a functionary, about in this House. What does he hope to achieve by this? He confessed that it may be necessary to intercept certain things, and the finding of the Advocate-General was that in this particular case it was in fact necessary. But look at what the Advocate-General said as regards the functionary whose name the hon. member now wants to bandy about. He says in paragraph 10.3—

He goes on to say in paragraph 10.4—

That is where I told him that there was a technical defect in the procedure followed. The procedure followed was not correct in the opinion of the Advocate-General. It is against this background that we must see the entire matter. However, today the hon. member quoted from the Post Office Act regarding disciplinary steps to be taken against officials. I am not an official of the Post Office. The hon. member, who is a lawyer, must study his laws better. If the hon. member, as a lawyer, wants to know about costs recovered, on which a decision must still be taken, I want to refer him to the State Liability Act, 1957. The hon. member should go and read that Act and then he can discuss matters with me further.

The hon. member for Verwoerdburg made an appeal on behalf of his constituency, that growing town. We can hardly call it a town any more; it is becoming a city. I have good news for the hon. member. Planning for the enlargement of the post office building there is already under way. It involves in the main, additional counters for serving the public, the installation of 850 additional private post boxes, separate accommodation for the postal delivery service in a separate part of the building and a number of internal adjustments and extensions to provide additional and improved offices and facilities for departmental purposes and the staff. The estimated cost is about R300 000. Sketch plans have already been approved and the complete documentation has been scheduled for February 1982. I can therefore give the hon. member very good news.

Thank you very much.

The hon. member for Durban North, who unfortunately cannot be here and who has made an apology for that, spoke about the post office in Durban North. All that I can tell the hon. member today is that we shall investigate the situation there. I am aware of the fact that it is a densely populated area and, if the position is in fact such that the post office there has to serve about 25 000 people, then I think the time has arrived where we shall have to improve the facilities at that post office. As was explained by the hon. member, the facilities would appear to be inadequate and the building too small. He also referred to the problems they are experiencing there in regard to public telephones as well as a post-box. He mentioned the fact that there was only one post-box in that vicinity. As far as public telephones are concerned I must tell the hon. member that we are experiencing great problems. That is the reason why we are now using these orange-coloured telephone canopies and not the old-style telephone booth with a door. We are using these canopies because of increased vandalism not only to the telephone booth itself but also to the telephone equipment. As I announced the other day, we intend introducing new public telephones. [Interjections.] No, the hon. member is quite wrong. I said in my speech last Tuesday that these telephones will take four different coins. One will even be able to dial overseas from them. In any event, we shall investigate this matter and perhaps we shall be able to install some of these new telephones in the Durban North area.

The hon. member also spoke about our savings facilities and I can inform him that the idea is to decentralize the new EFTS system to places such as hypermarkets and so forth, as he suggested.

As far as philately is concerned, he asked that this service should be available at all the more important post offices and not only at the Central Post Office in Durban, for instance. We shall investigate the matter to see whether or not this can be done. As I am now dealing with this matter, it may be very interesting for hon. members to hear something about the extent of our philatelic services.

*As far as philatelists are concerned, the number of deposit account holders increased from 12 267 to 27 386 between 31 March 1976 and 31 March of this year, a period of five years. This is an increase of 123% and gives an indication of the tremendous interest in philately as far as deposit accounts are concerned. The Post Office’s profits in this connection also rose between June 1977 and this year. They rose from R1 083 000 to R1 770 000. These are the profits made from philately services alone, services in which great interest is shown and which also advertise our country.

The hon. member for Newton Park made an interesting speech on the various new services offered by the Post Office, especially in the field of telecommunications. He also mentioned the fact that we have decided to decentralize certain head office functions to Port Elizabeth. It may also be of interest to hon. members to know that Port Elizabeth—interestingly enough not Cape Town or any other place—was the city in South Africa where the first hand-operated telephone exchange in South Africa was installed. That was 99 years ago. In May next year, it will be 100 years since that exchange was installed. We shall see whether we can take the same large exhibition we used for the Republic Festival, to Port Elizabeth to commemorate the occasion.

†The hon. member for Constantia referred to the position that in terms of the Act we cannot employ married women.

No, I did not say that. I said that they are deemed to be automatically retired.

Yes, but it amounts to the same.

Not quite.

What we have been able to do, is to overcome this problem administratively. I can inform the hon. member that we have several hundreds of married women on our permanent staff, but if necessary we can reconsider the particular provision with a view to its deletion.

Thank you.

The hon. member said that he noticed that fewer postal boxes were installed during the last couple of years than say four years ago. One cannot make a comparison on a from year to year basis, because it all depends whether in a particular year some big post office buildings were erected which could automatically make available several thousands of postal boxes. I must point out, too, that nowadays and especially in new residential areas we are trying to bring about what is generally referred to as service centres. In such a centre there are postal boxes from which the client collects his mail, but with the difference that he does not pay any rental for that box. This type of centre is providing the same kind of service as the traditional postal box.

As far as Constantia is concerned, we shall go into the matter to see whether we can make more postal boxes available. The hon. member mentioned the shopping centre and it may be quite possible that we supply a service centre with postal boxes there.

I am not quite sure whether the Stalplein post office really serves a business community. It does serve the H.F. Verwoerd Building and perhaps some of the minor buildings in the vicinity. One must bear in mind that the Stalplein post office has been in use for only a couple of years, perhaps just a decade or so. All the businessmen in the vicinity of this post office became so used to their postal box numbers at the general post office in Cape Town that they would rather prefer making use of those postal boxes. I do not think it is a viable proposition to start with postal boxes at Stalplein.

*The hon. member for Boksburg drew attention to the fact that the Post Office is actually the body with the greatest interest in the development of the electronics industry in South Africa. We also try to make a contribution through the Post Office’s involvement in Sames and the hon. member will also note that in our operating budget for this year, provision is made for R6,4 million in respect of repayable amounts for that undertaking for the manufacture of electronic components. In essence this is also our first electronics industry in this connection.

†The hon. member for Durban Point was as grateful as all hon. members, I believe, because of the services rendered by the telephone section of the department during the last general election. It is a general instruction to all postmasters and other staff members to make available during election times equal facilities to all political parties. I am grateful to have learnt from the hon. member that he, too, is very pleased with that particular service.

He then made a plea for more public telephones at military camps and mentioned, inter alia, Voortrekkerhoogte.

I want more public telephones in all of them.

I agree with the hon. member.

Especially the new ones, like Upington and so on.

The hon. the Minister of Defence is present at the moment and perhaps it is just as well. As long as the hon. member can convince my colleague—this is money for the Post Office—we shall try our utmost to make more public telephones available. I am sure that in military camps we shall not experience the problem of vandalism. I am quite sure of that and therefore I am in full agreement with the hon. member. Perhaps the hon. member noticed the temporary public telephones that were made available by my department during the Republic Festival in Durban, and to what extent they were used by members of the Defence Force in the course of those celebrations.

*The hon. member for Springs is a happy man because a new post office is being planned for his constituency, and building operations will commence shortly. However, he is not only getting a new Post office; they also have one of the best postmasters in the country. Mr. Jacobs is president of our largest staff association, and in Post Office circles he is regarded with great respect. The hon. member is indeed fortunate to have him as postmaster. The hon. member referred to the East Rand area. This is actually the area where the electronics industry is so active, and I therefore want to refer him to what I said in this connection to the hon. member for Boksburg.

†The hon. member for Albany asked that the installation of services for rural areas and especially for farmers should be speeded up. However, one of the problems is that when an automatic exchange is to be installed, one tends to long for the good old days of the farm line, with “nommer asseblief” and all that goes with it. We are, however, progressing, and I am glad that the hon. member referred to the SOR system which will soon be installed in his constituency, as I indicated yesterday in reply to a question. The SOR 18 system enables up to 19 subscribers making use of the same pair of wires to talk simultaneously just as privately as the person who uses a private telephone in the city. They can all speak at the same time to any subscriber at an automatic telephone exchange both in this country and overseas. Their conversations will not be heard by the other subscribers on the line, they do not disturb each other nor do they have to wait to make a call, as is the case with the present semi-automatic farm-line system.

Can they talk for as long as they like?

They can, provided they pay for it. The problem with some hon. members over there is that they are not prepared to pay. They complain and tell my department that they had never made all these calls. We then have to attach an instrument to their telephones which even records the numbers dialled.

That is telephone tapping.

No, it is not tapping; it is an instrument. I am here referring to a specific gentleman who more or less moves in the same circles as the hon. member over there. I repeat: People may talk as long as they wish provided they pay for it.

I would rather have a party line. [Interjections.]

The hon. member for Albany also asked for other facilities for rural subscribers and farmers, and referred to telephones in motor-cars. At this stage I do not think it is possible to use this type of telephone in remote country areas. We have such a system in use on the Witwatersrand. One has to make use of antennas, of course. Fairly soon we also intend bringing that system to Cape Town and to other areas, such as Durban. Perhaps we can eventually also make the service available to the country areas. We do indeed make every effort to assist our farming community when it comes to telecommunication services.

*The hon. member for Roodepoort made a plea for special stamps in 1984 to celebrate the 100th birthday of the discovery of gold, and a special stamp for the eisteddfod in Roodepoort. I do not want to refuse him today, but he made it possible for me to put one of our problems to him today. We received over 100 applications for next year’s issues last year, applications which were all well motivated. There is however a policy which has been laid down and which must conform to international practice. Special stamps for the philately service must be kept to a minimum, and we have a specific minimum. If one makes more stamps available they are worthless, and then philatelists are not interested in those stamps. But just try to make a choice out of over 100 and satisfy everyone! Some of my other colleagues also have people in their constituencies who are dissatisfied because a specific historic event was not chosen. However, one can only use a few. Not that I do not realize the merit of the hon. member’s case. However, this brings me to a statement I wish to make in public today. We shall have to reconsider the way in which we handle the issue of new stamps. It does not seem to me as if linking issues of stamps to commemorations or special events is still a viable proposition. Perhaps we could find a new formula, just as long as we do not deviate from a very conservative approach to such issues. If we did so deviate, it could cause the popularity of our philately service to decrease considerably. However, the hon. member must submit his application. It will be considered in due course.

The hon. member also referred to vehicle accidents. The accidents usually occur in the urban areas, where the traffic patterns are such that our vehicles necessarily become involved in accidents.

The hon. member also referred to free services to institutions for the deaf and the blind. This is only applicable to the blind and persons with limited vision. It is also connected with the School for the Deaf in Worcester and the Trans-Oranje School for the Deaf who do the training for us. That is why these free services are offered.

The hon. member also referred to the extent of unpaid telephone accounts. He suggested we ask for a deposit. We already do this. We do not ask a man for a deposit without reason, but if he gives us trouble for a long period and does not play the game, we make him pay a deposit. But this sort of thing still happens. People leave the country to escape debts or whatever, and leave a string of debts behind them. However, if a man has a poor record—in other words, if he does not pay promptly—he is requested to pay a deposit.

†The hon. member for Mooi River said there was a deterioration in the postal services, especially in small towns. That is quite possible. We have to rely on contractors in some cases—mostly it is the S.A. Railways—to transport our mail. The S.A. Railways have, however, cut down on some of their services in order to economize. The Railways do not operate services as regularly in all directions as it used to, especially in the remote country areas. That affects us too. If it is worthwhile, we make use of a contractor, but sometimes it is not worthwhile. The hon. member commented that at Underberg and Nottingham Road, and also at some other places, mail was only collected on the Tuesday following the preceding Friday. At this moment I do not have the necessary information for the hon. member. However, I cannot believe that that is possible. That is too long a time for well-known places like Underberg. It could be that there are difficulties with transport, but I will go into the matter and I will inform the hon. member afterwards. I can assure him that the rural areas still enjoy high priority with the department. We are trying to improve the conditions under which people are living in the rural areas of the country.

With that I think I have replied to all the points raised.

Clause agreed to.

Mr. Speaker, I move, subject to Standing Order No. 56—

Mr. Speaker, I find that the only area of agreement that I have with the hon. the Minister at this stage is regarding his thanks to the media. I should like to associate myself and my party with him in thanking them for the extensive coverage of the budget and the clarity with which it was put to the public. Other than this, I have nothing but disagreement with the hon. the Minister at this stage.

I should like to start by telling the hon. the Minister that I resent strongly his remarks about Yasser Arafat. If the hon. the Minister wants to get personal he has supplied us with ample ammunition and we will use it. I am not, however, going to descend to his level.

It is too low down.

The hon. the Minister keeps on referring to the report in the Rand Daily Mail. He cannot understand that the report was a prognostication of what would happen in the budget based on the only figures available at the time, which were the figures in February 1981 and the projections in terms of those figures. I do not have the figures for 1981-’82. The hon. the Minister has it and he only tabled it the day afterwards. So how could I then have made a prognostication on a budget that had never been discussed here? It seems to me the hon. the Minister likes to look for little mistakes and little inaccuracies. He and the hon. member for Sunnyside take great delight in trying to find little mistakes, but two can play that game. I want to ask the hon. the Minister how many new telephones were installed during the period 1979-’80.

The previous year? 204 000 telephones were installed.

204 000 telephones?

That is correct.

Very well. On 9 February 1981 I put the following question to the hon. the Minister—

The reply was 591 326.

That must be a misprint.

Is that a mistake? Why did the hon. the Minister not correct it? The hon. member for Sunnyside said this was a gigantic improvement in telephone services and he also quoted that figure here. It appears in Hansard.

Yes.

There it is, the hon. member admits it. Even the figure given by the hon. the Minister today does not conform with the figure in the report for 1979-’80. On page 4 and again on page 7 of the report the figure given is 206 070 telephones for the year. So the hon. the Minister must not try to score little points off us. He makes mistakes himself at times.

That was not my point. [Interjections.]

I feel like an attorney cross-examining an accused in asking him for the third and last time what the costs involved with the telephone tapping were. Who is going to pay for that—the Minister or the taxpayer? Thirdly, how can he assure the House that nobody’s telephone is being tapped if the gap still exists in the law and it has not been amended yet? The same applies to the interception of mail. If the hon. the Minister now for the third and last time fails to answer this question, I must ask the House and the public outside to draw their own conclusions. And they will!

They will also draw their own conclusions about you.

Sir, it was very interesting to listen to the debate. It was very funny to hear the hon. member for Maitland make a big story out of how a letter is transported from here all the way to Ellisras with only a five cent stamp on it. Really, are we supposed to believe that all the lorry took was one little letter with a five cent stamp on it? Is that the impression the hon. member tried to create?

Come now!

How can we accept that, Sir?

*The hon. member for Rosettenville became somewhat confused while he was speaking. He spoke of the subsidy, of the money which, according to the Wiehahn Report, should be used for capital expenditure under this Vote. He said that 50% of the money came from the funds of the Post Office and that 50% was obtained by way of loans. He then referred to the loss in respect of telephone services. He was getting confused. The one has nothing to do with the other. The report of the Wiehahn Commission concerns capital costs and has nothing whatsoever to do with the loss on telephone services.

You heard incorrectly.

Mr. Speaker, I come to the question of staff. We have discussed the shortage of staff and we all agree that there are problems with regard to technical staff. I should like to point out, however, that there is also a problem with regard to the staff in the post offices. Those people are suffering. I can say that the staff in many little post offices are dissatisfied. There may be between two and five staff members in a post office. When one of them does not turn up for work because of illness or for other reasons, the remaining staff members in the little post office—I am referring now to the clerical and administrative members of staff who serve the public—have to make up for the one who did not turn up. In other words, the four who are left will have to make up for the fifth person who is not there. They will have to do the work he does in eight hours. What is the overtime involved? It is only four hours. In the case where only two staff members out of a total of three are on duty, those two have to make up for that and they only get paid for four hours overtime for the work the third person would have taken eight hours to do. Is that fair? I think the hon. the Minister ought to look at the clerical and administrative staff and not forget them, because there is dissatisfaction among them, I can tell you that, Sir.

It is said that the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Perhaps the results in this case will be forthcoming in March next year when the hon. the Minister gives us an accurate figure of how many people resigned, particularly those whose 20 years are up, those who are in addition waiting for their pensions and those who have returned from doing their military service. I do not want to encourage them; I want them to stay. I should like them to stay because they are rendering a valuable service to South Africa.

What did you refer to concerning the 20 years?

It has nothing to do with pensions. Let me tell him what I mean. I want him to do me a favour and ask some of the people with 20 years’ service in the Post Office whether they will allow their children to take up posts in the Post Office.

We have hundreds of children of Post Office officials in our service.

Ask them about that.

Then I want to come to the question of housing. I want to state quite clearly that as far as housing is concerned we want to encourage the provision of houses. We are happy to let the Government have the R14 million odd for housing. Let the Post Office start with new projects. Let them buy their own land and build their own homes, with the greatest of pleasure. I am delighted that the hon. the Minister refuted the story about the R100 000 flats in Pretoria. I am only very surprised that he did not do so before. This appeared in the Sunday Times on 14 June this year, I believe. It is quite a long time ago. I did not see any repudiation of it.

I should like, however, to refer to something else I read. In an article in Postel of July 1981 it was stated that there were super flats for staff transferred to Durban. We are also told of 41 flat units at Empangeni, 26 at Newcastle, eight at Vryheid and a block of 63 flats purchased at Umbilo near the Durban city centre. The hon. the Minister should know—I told him about this personally—of a block of flats in Parkview, Johannesburg, where people were at their wits’ end. One particular woman said she was battling to have her child complete his education. Those people were about to be ejected because the Post Office was going to take over the block of flats. This is not merely a question of honouring the leases. Leases are in order. The question is, however, how many landlords grant leases today and how many people have leases on their flats? Those people have nowhere to go. This amounts to a problem on both sides. [Interjections.] The hon. the Minister cannot simply use the power granted to him by the Government and walk over people, tell them to get out and let other people move in and pay a rent which is subsidized. If I did use the word “expropriation”, I am sorry. It was my mistake. I meant “purchase”. As far as I know these buildings are purchased. Nevertheless, that makes no difference to my argument. The people are still being given notice and told to move out.

Pirates.

I believe the hon. the Minister is going to be faced with a problem.

Pirates. Brigands.

If it is correct, and I think it is correct … [Interjections.]

I said that is acting like pirates or brigands. [Interjections.]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Minister has not denied what I alleged during the Committee Stage, viz. that when occupation is taken of some of these flats, the new occupants will pay a subsidized rental amounting to a minimum of R16,50 and a maximum of R65, while some of the flats have a normal rental of R350 to R375. Is that correct? I take it that it is correct. The new occupants will pay this low rental of R16,50 …

They pay according to their salaries.

According to their salaries?

That is right.

Then I should like to ask the hon. the Minister one specific thing. If and when—and that “when” is going to be very soon—the hon. the Minister of Finance taxes fringe benefits for everybody, what is going to happen to these people who are paying these subsidized rentals? What is going to happen to them then? [Interjections.] They are paying R16,50 for a R375 flat. How is the hon. the Minister going to cope with that situation? Who is going to pay their taxes? Are they going to have to pay tax on their fringe benefits? I should like to hear from the hon. the Minister what is going to happen. I say this with great respect, Mr. Speaker.

There is one other bone of contention between the hon. the Minister and me. I should like to know from the hon. the Minister what his policy is in respect of the following issue. Is he against hon. members of the Opposition visiting Post Office installations, Post Office branches, Post Office works etc., in order to see for themselves what is going on there? Why did he stop the hon. member for Bezuidenhout and myself —after he had just been elected to this House—from going on a two-day tour that had been arranged by Post Office officials? We took the trouble to reserve those two days for this very purpose because we were sufficiently interested in going along to see those institutions. Why is the hon. the Minister afraid to allow hon. members of the official Opposition to go on such a tour? We do not want to go on phoney tours. We want to see the Post Office and its installations in operation. We want to see the Post Office staff at work in their normal way. We want to speak with them in a normal way. We do not want parties or dinners. We do not want tea or receptions. We do not want a red carpet. All we want is to see the people working in their natural environment. Why does the hon. the Minister stop a tour like that? Why does he not allow us to go on such a tour?

They do not want you there. [Interjections.]

The hon. the Minister says we have to go with everybody else …

They do not want you.

We all have to go as one party. [Interjections.]

Order!

The officials did not want you there.

Well, does the hon. the Minister endorse what the hon. member for Roodeplaat has just said? [Interjections.] Is that true? I should like the hon. the Minister to tell me whether that is true. Is the hon. the Minister’s answer that he does not want us there? [Interjections.]

Order!

With the greatest respect, there was no quarrel with us as far as I know, and if the officials did not want us there the hon. the Minister should have told us. In fact, the hon. the Minister did not tell us that.

I should now like to pay tribute, if I may, to the 11th Field Postal Unit. Not since the Second World War has there been a postal unit in the field. This postal unit has its headquarters in Pretoria. It operates on the border where it is doing a great job handling the field post office and delivering mail. This is a great improvement indeed.

Talking about postal services, complaints have been received from the public that letters are not being delivered as quickly as they should be. During the general election a postal vote application from Grahamstown to Cape Town took 10 days. I do not know what happened in the end but surely it should not have taken 10 days?

Was it registered? [Interjections.] Did you do something about it? Did you report the matter to the local postmaster?

At the height of an election when one only has limited time to file one’s postal votes one does not have the time to go running around. [Interjections.] Would it have helped to report it to the postmaster? This problem does exist. I have also received complaints from people with regard to overseas mail. The fault, however, does not lie entirely with South Africa. Particularly mail from the United States is taking three to four weeks to reach us in South Africa. As hon. members know, all letters from the United States come to Cape Town first. They are sorted in Cape Town and then distributed. There may be problems with containers that come by sea and this could cause further delay. With the electronic devices and the more modern equipment at his disposal I would urge the hon. the Minister to concentrate specifically on Cape Town in order to cope particularly with mail coming from the United States and to see that it is processed a little bit more expeditiously than this is being done at the moment.

That is all I wish to say with regard to these matters. I thank the telecommunications section of the department for training telephonists. I think they provide a good service. I think the museum in Pretoria is an asset and I think that more people should go to see it. I believe too that the philatelic service is one that does a tremendous job.

Mr. Speaker, never in my life have I heard an hon. member complain so much. I really do not know how his wife can endure living with him if he can carry on like this for almost two days. He commenced with a personal vendetta which he is conducting against the hon. the Minister and in my opinion displayed an unnecessary sensitivity. If one says things in newspapers beforehand, surely this is, after all, a cane one is picking for oneself, and in that case one must not be surprised if one is given a beating with it. Unfortunately I do not have enough time to go into all the matters which the hon. member mentioned, but I shall deal with some of the aspects in the course of my speech. The budget we are dealing with and which is on the point of being finalized, attests once again to an unrivalled success story, to such an extent that the Opposition has been able to find little that is concrete to criticize. We have just seen once again how, in his umpteenth turn to speak, the hon. member has sought only paltry points to criticize. In as far as was necessary the hon. the Minister has already replied to the arguments advanced during the debate. This budget is not only a success story; it is also an achievement which was made possible by the dedication, enthusiasm, zeal and loyalty of the Post Office staff, and when I speak of “staff’, then I mean everyone, from the Postmaster-General right down to the youngest staff member. If it had not been for these people, these achievements would not have been possible.

South Africa’s growth and economic prosperity, with everything this entails, makes extremely heavy demands on the Post Office and its staff. Not only has it caused the demand for telecommunications services to increase, but the same prosperity has created staff shortages and aggravated existing shortages. For example, we know that in certain geographic areas such as the PWV area and, inter alia, in Durban, there are very serious shortages. It is in these very areas where the poaching of staff occurs most frequently. It was pointed out earlier in this debate that it is in the technical and clerical spheres in particular that the staff shortage is the greatest. This shortage, and the outflow to the private sector, are creating grave problems for the Post Office in maintaining its necessary services and providing new services. It is specifically the private sector which is luring away the essential and trained staff, which is failing to train staff itself, despite the opportunities which have been created for it to do so. It is usually those people who lure away the staff who are first to criticize the Post Office when posts and telecommunications services cannot be rendered effectively.

I have on a previous occasion made a certain appeal and I should like to repeat it. I asked that the private sector should make use of the Government incentives which are available to enable it to train its own people itself. In regard to the problem which arises out of the poaching of staff, about which a great deal has been said, I want to ask the hon. the Minister whether it is not time to design a system by means of which a levy is imposed on certain firms which make use of technical staff. If such firms have to contribute to such a fund every month, there will be adequate funds to train and pay suitable people. If this is not done, those firms which are guilty of this practice will consequently realize that they have now reached a point where they themselves will have to train their own competent staff. We shall probably not be able to suggest an ideal scheme today, but I am convinced that there are solutions and that solutions can be found to meet this problem. I want to put it to the hon. the Minister pertinently whether he does not want to give serious consideration to appointing a commission, if need be, to go into this specific problem. I am convinced that the answer does not lie in high remuneration only. It is true that the Post Office is independent, but it is part of a large machine, nor is it in isolation, and the salaries it has to pay must also correspond with and take into account the prevailing position in our public service. After all, we are one economy and it would be foolhardy not to take into account the position in our country as well when fixing salary scales. I am convinced that this is a very important matter. It is a crucial matter. It is a matter around which all our arguments have centred. We must find ways of supplementing this staff as well as of curbing this poaching of staff.

There has been a small reduction in the number of fulltime Post Office staff. At present the number stands at 76 358. However, whereas there has been a reduction in staff, posts and telecommunications services are increasing and the demands being made are growing and expanding. I greatly appreciate the fact that the staff has been able to maintain services and achieve expansion. Consequently I must congratulate the Post Office on the means it is applying—reference has been made to this today and consequently I shall not elaborate on it any further—for example the optimum— utilization—I should almost say—of female labour. The Post Office is making use of other population groups and is giving them identified training in order to be able to utilize them to the optimum degree. The Post Office is seeing to the recruitment of people overseas. In addition, the Post Office is using labour-saving devices in order to save labour. Another method being pursued to bridge the problem is the decentralization of certain head office activities to other centres in this country. A great deal has been said about this today as well.

The Post Office is trying to overcome its problems inter alia by way of a housing scheme. Study aid is being granted its students. Engineering bursary holders are receiving achievement awards. I could continue in this vein to demonstrate that the Post Office intends to make the grade and to render a better service.

I would be neglecting my duty if I did not also mention on this occasion the really outstanding service which the Post Office is rendering to us in this Parliament. I believe I am speaking on behalf of all hon. members when I convey a special word of thanks to these people for what they are doing for us. [Interjections.] I can testify to only the greatest friendliness and helpfulness which I receive from these people every day under quite difficult circumstances.

Finally I should also very much like to congratulate the Post Office on the excellent broadcasts we received from New Zealand recently. I believe that approximately six channels were tuned into New Zealand. Both the television and radio broadcasts were excellent and I watched and/or listened to most of them. They came over beautifully and it was as good as if those cameras were in operation here in Cape Town. I want to thank the Post Office for this. However, this is not the only aspect of importance, for the fact remains that a breakthrough was made here as well. By means of these excellent broadcasts we established communications with overseas countries, and this could give rise to international co-operation which we badly need.

I shall conclude by saying to the hon. the Minister and the Post Office staff that we are looking forward with great expectations to the implementation of all the new developments envisaged and on which the Post Office and its people are working.

Mr. Speaker, in his reply to the Second Reading debate the hon. the Minister gave a long explanation and he told us about the achievements of the Post Office in the field of telecommunications. We accept the fact that a number of these achievements are worthy of note but I think we must always remember that services provided in the field of telecommunications are not rendered for nothing. They are rendered by the Post Office which, as I said earlier, is a business undertaking, and they are rendered for that very old-fashioned reason, the profit motive. I think the hon. the Minister referred on two occasions to the fact that approximately 150 000 telephones had been transferred during the course of one year. I do not believe that one must look upon that as being something that lends itself to difficulties as far as services are concerned. This is a normal service. This is a service the Post Office renders to the public and for which the public pays. This, I would say, is something to which the public is entitled. After all is said and done, it is not as if they are getting it for nothing; they are paying for every transfer. The hon. the Minister made rather heavy weather of this and I think it is rather unfortunate that he used that in his argument because I do not accept that as an argument.

I merely tried to explain the extent of the activities.

Very well. Let me raise the next point and here, I believe, the hon. the Minister does himself a disservice when he starts to make comparisons. I say this not only to him but to any hon. member on the benches opposite: For heaven’s sake, let us stop making comparisons. We all know that our postal service is the cheapest in the world but when we start making comparisons with telephone backlogs in Spain, France and other countries, we only get hoots of derision …

If it is true, why cannot one say it?

One can say it if it is true. [Interjections.] Well, then, let us make comparisons with every single country in the world and not be selective. Let us not just choose those which put us in the best light. We are always doing this and we should stop it. I shall ask the hon. the Minister now to give us the comparison between this country and the United States of America. Give us the comparison between this country and Canada or the United Kingdom. Let us have a few of those comparisons and let us stop playing around with countries like Spain. I think the hon. member for Houghton said: “What about San Salvador and Ecuador?” Do not make comparisons because at the best of times comparisons are odious and it does nothing at all to help prove a point.

Providing it is a comparable country.

Does the hon. the Minister sincerely believe that Spain is a country which he can compare with South Africa?

Yes, it is a developing country, as I pointed out. Spain is not a developed country.

I would object to that. The hon. the Minister spoke about the telephone backlog and said—

Am I to understand that we must accept that as a rule of thumb from the hon. the Minister?

Of course, it is normal world-wide.

Can we accept that as a rule of thumb—that when this country goes into a state of recession the backlog in telephones will be reduced dramatically? As long as we have that on record I am perfectly happy.

During the course of my Second Reading speech I unfortunately had occasion to cross swords with the hon. the Minister and he took me to task on it. Watching television the other evening, I made a note of what the hon. the Minister said in reply to a question by the interviewer as to whether there was a shortage of staff and what the hon. the Minister intended doing to meet the situation. His reply was—

I do not think that it was unreasonable for me to assume that the hon. the Minister was having difficulty, because in his Second Reading speech he said—

I do not think that it is unreasonable to infer from that that there is a measure of difficulty being experienced. I do not think that I was wrong in concluding from either of those two statements that there was a certain measure of difficulty being experienced. I am sorry, I cannot accept that the hon. the Minister should take me to task on that.

I do not know where you found that.

I will tell the hon. the Minister where I found it. In the hon. the Minister’s Second Reading speech he said—

What does that mean? It means that the Post Office is continuing with its efforts to get people from overseas. The way I understand the English language, it means we have not really been all that successful, but our efforts are continuing unabated. Am I reading this incorrectly? [Interjections.] As I say, that is how I understand the English language.

You are splitting hairs now.

Well, let me take the hon. the Minister to task on another statement of his. This afternoon in this House—and I ask the hon. the Minister if this is correct—the hon. the Minister said, and I quote from the unrevised Hansard—

He was going to continue with what he said. Am I correct in that? Is that what the hon. the Minister said?

Either higher than or separate from the Public Service.

Oh no. That is not what stands here. The hon. the Minister said, and I quote again—

I immediately said—

The Minister then replied—

I then replied—

The Minister’s reply was—

To this I again said—

The Minister replied—

Now, the hon. member for Durban Point asked a question.

Nobody asked me.

So, the hon. the Minister has checked it. Well, let us have it on record. I quote, from the unrevised Hansard, what the hon. member for Durban Point asked on 2 September—

My reply was—

I think the hon. the Minister owes the hon. member for Durban Point an apology, and I think he would do well to accord the hon. member that apology across the floor of this House.

In conclusion I want to associate myself with something else that happened here. It is not for me to interfere in arguments between members of the Cabinet and the official Opposition, but I am appalled at the level to which this debate descended this afternoon when the hon. the Minister elected to become personal about the PFP’s official spokesman on Posts and Telecommunications. I think that it was a disgrace and that he should be ashamed of himself.

Mr. Speaker, it has unfortunately been a characteristic of this debate that all sorts of efforts have been made by both Opposition parties to grasp at any straw imaginable in an effort to generate a little criticism of the budget. It is a pity that the hon. member for Umhlanga, too, was guilty of the same effort, for I have always had respect for that hon. member.

However, I do not think the matter is important enough to dwell on. In the final phase of this debate I believe it is more important to pass a few concluding remarks on the positive characteristics of the 1981 Post Office budget. It is clear from this budget that the Post Office is in the forefront of really dynamic development in its field in South Africa. The fact was spelled out very clearly in the budget that 12 new services and developments have been introduced by the Post Office during the past year or are to be introduced during the coming months in the field of posts and telecommunications services. Twelve new services and developments of this nature represent an exceptional achievement. This must be emphasized repeatedly, for it is an indication of the quality of life of the people of South Africa which has been reflected in this sphere as well. I think that a grave responsibility rests on the department in respect of the future. The question of staff is most certainly the major bottleneck. We have no quarrel with the official Opposition or with the NRP in that regard, for it is certainly the crucial issue. However, it is likewise the crucial issue for the whole national economy at this stage, and this applies to the private sector, too, and not only to the Post Office as a single department. The question is: What are we doing about this crucial issue? It is as well that we put this question, for the official Opposition has not come forward with a single constructive contribution in an effort to solve this problem. This is the complaint we must level at them. However, if we examine what the Post Office itself is doing in respect of this crucial problem in its own situation, one finds, in my opinion, many good examples of what has already been done. The hon. member for Kempton Park, too, referred to that a moment ago. I should like to single out a few aspects of the research which the department itself is carrying out in this sphere. Firstly there are the research projects which the department itself is undertaking to improve training facilities, as well as to alleviate the shortage of available manpower. I first wish to mention the research projects which have already been undertaken. The first is the annual recruitment campaign among school-leavers. After all, this is the obvious recruitment field. The hon. member for Hillbrow made a wild assumption just now, but for his information I want to tell him that the finding of an investigation into this matter brought to light, inter alia, that the department’s officials and parents indeed provide the greatest measure of assistance to the department in respect of staff recruitment. Research has also been carried out with regard to the rate of staff turnover within the department, the effect of staff attitudes on productivity, motivation, etc. Then, too, there has been research into the design and implementation of a staff development programme on a continuous basis, as well as an investigation into the effect of physical and psychological working conditions of the staff.

There has also been research on the development of a refresher course for welfare officers in the Post Office, as well as an evaluation of those officers. The department is already envisaging the following in respect of future research in this sphere: The development of techniques for the identification of management potential at the entry level; the extent of knowledge obsolescence in the department and measures to counter it, and the design of a course for Post Office recruitment officers. In my opinion these are all constructive contributions which the department has undertaken on its own initiative in an effort to solve this crucial issue of a manpower shortage.

Finally I should also like to refer to something exceptional, something which I think the hon. the Minister mentioned in his budget speech, but which was only touched on in passing. However, this is something which is typical of the initiative and the fresh thinking in the department not only as regards technical skills, but as regards staff skills as well. In his budget speech the hon. the Minister referred to the management development centre idea. This is something which was brought to South Africa by the private sector quite recently, during the ’seventies. The Post Office investigated this system as well and is at present implementing it. In fact, the first of these centre systems was implemented by the Post Office a year ago, in September 1980. I think the Post Office had good reason to investigating this matter. I do not want to go into detail, but it was clear to the Post Office that in view of certain circumstances it is necessary to ensure at all times that the management qualities of the staff in one’s organization are improved. Particularly in view of the fact that most of the top and senior managers are people of a relatively advanced age, continuity and succession problems arise. This applies to any organization. In the second place, greater know-how is required in the management of business undertakings in view of the rapid change in the technological and economic spheres. In these circumstances employees can no longer be expected to equip themselves on their own initiative for the demands made on them by higher management posts. It is a valid standpoint to say that the business undertaking has a joint responsibility with the employee in respect of the latter’s development.

In respect of this specific development which is being undertaken by the Post Office, it is very clear that skills have already emerged which can most definitely be utilized on the road ahead in the field of the management skills of the Post Office officials. It is necessary that this be done, for this concerns the fundamental management aspects, viz. drive, decision-making ability, leadership, communication skills and administrative skills. All these things can be improved by means of this evaluation system, not because the evaluation system is able to ensure the final product, but because that system ultimately enables staff skills to be improved by way of further training and various training modules. This is indeed evident from the fact that since September 1980 there have already been 78 participants in this system. A further 64 managers have already been trained as observers and 51 of these participants have already been trained further in specific modules. I think this demonstrates that the Post Office is a leader in its field, not only as far as technical skills are concerned, but also in that it is prepared to keep ahead at the level of the staff skills in South Africa. In conclusion, then, the important thing which we on this side of the House can say is that we give our whole-hearted support to the budget because we can look forward to a successful and effective management of the Post Office in future as well as an effective service rendered by the Post Office to the people of South Africa.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Hillbrow came back to the question of housing and flats in his Third Reading speech. The one thing he wanted to know was whether the rentals would really be so low. I have told him that the rentals depend on the salaries of the people concerned. In this regard the policy of the Post Office is no different from that in the rest of the Public Service. Where accommodation of this nature is provided, it is done on the same basis. However, if the hon. member is suggesting that we evicted people there, I want to tell him that this is not true.

In Parkview?

He knows about the conversation we had and the undertaking we gave. This is now the property of the Post Office. We did not expropriate it, we bought it. We had to provide accommodation for people at once and not in two years’ time. So we bought it last year. We were considerate, as the hon. member knows. We did not put people out on the street. However, we get no gratitude for that, only this kind of criticism.

The hon. member was also splitting hairs when he asked me how many telephones had been installed in a certain year. I gave him a figure off the cuff which was very nearly correct.

[Inaudible.]

Then he said that I had misled him in reply to a question earlier this year. In any event, that was what it amounted to—I do not think he used the word “mislead”. He quoted from Hansard. I have a copy of the reply with me.

†It reads as follows—

The reply was—

That was the figure quoted by the hon. member. It was, however, a written reply. The hon. member could not have missed this. It was a written reply with a note added at the end, which I want to quote—

The hon. member had only to read that note in order to have everything made clear to him. [Interjections.]

What about your speech that was reported in Hansard?

Well, this is also published …

The figure you quoted appears in Hansard.

What I have just quoted also appears in Hansard. The problem is that the hon. member for Hillbrow merely quotes what he wishes to quote, what suits him. That is my problem with him. That is why, instead of taking part in debates in this House, he issues statements to newspapers in which he says, inter alia, that at the beginning of the current financial year the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications had R110 million available with which to run the Post Office. According to him this money was readily available in cash. If the hon. member had made a study of the budget documents he would have known that it was intended to use that surplus to finance the capital programme for that particular financial year. My request to the hon. member is merely this: If he wishes to comment on certain matters, such as that particular housing scheme in Pretoria, and when there is no opportunity of doing so in this House where I can reply to what he says, he should please approach my department or the Postmaster-General to obtain the necessary information from them.

I visited the Department as well.

Now the hon. member also complains about the tour organized for him and the hon. member for Bezuidenhout, which was subsequently cancelled. I should give hon. members the background to this story. I received a letter from the hon. member for Hillbrow on 22 June. In that letter he complained about the fact that the Postmaster-General had cancelled the arrangement for the inspection of various branches of the Department of Posts and Telecommunications scheduled to take place on 7 and 9 July by the hon. member for Hillbrow and the hon. member for Bezuidenhout.

On your instructions.

Yes, on my instructions. I am not ashamed to admit that. The hon. member for Hillbrow wrote to me—

You know, Mr. Speaker, being a Parliamentarian the hon. member for Hillbrow went straight to some Post Office official and arranged a tour for Parliamentarians.

I did not go to an official. I went straight to the Postmaster-General.

I should like to inform hon. members now of my reply to the hon. member for Hillbrow. I leave it to hon. members of this House to decide for themselves whether I acted properly or not in this respect. I wrote to the hon. member on 14 July, as follows—

Perhaps on both occasions I was also surprised and disappointed, but I nevertheless intend inviting interested MP’s to tours both in Cape Town during the ensuing session, and to the North during November this year again to observe the latest developments in all facets of the Department’s activities.

You have been informed by the Postmaster-General that an exhibition dealing with all the activities of the Department was open for the public in Durban during the Republic Festival celebration, during May 1981. The public response was such that it was decided to repeat the exhibition both in other major cities in the course of the ensuing month. The day-to-day activities of the Department are such that it cannot be interrupted for visitors, even be they individual members of Parliament, at will. Apart from that we are introducing some of the most advanced modem technologies during the next few months, and I have therefore decided to invite once again interested members of Parliament later this year to visit activities of the Department on a well-organized tour, our third attempt in the course of two years.

I sincerely hope that this time those interested will make sure that their interest in SAPO affairs will take preference over their other commitments in order to really benefit from such a visit. Like other MP’s you will be duly contacted for a suitable date.

I now wish to come back to the actions of the hon. member. What he was trying to do—and I am not blaming his new colleague for this—was to rush off to post office institutions and in the next hour or two after that to rush to the Press in order to make a statement.

Is that what you were afraid of?

That is the way in which the hon. member approaches these matters. [Interjections.]

But let us be fair. What would have been the response of the hon. member for Umhlanga? What would have been the response of hon. members on my side of the House if they had heard about a private visit where everything had been arranged for only two members of Parliament? Is it not the custom whenever members of Parliament pay visits to institutions in which they are interested that they operate as parliamentarians? I think that is the only and proper way to do it. [Interjections.]

No, where do you get that from?

The hon. member for Hillbrow complained about a postal vote which took ten days to arrive at its destination from Grahamstown. I asked him whether he had reported the matter to the postmaster, but he was too busy with the election. If there is a problem with one letter out of the half a million letters that are handled in Cape Town every day, the hon. member complains. I do not know whether one of the people working for his party was late in posting that letter. The complaints about delayed mail often result from messengers who do not deliver their mail to the post office on time. Then the post office is blamed. In such a case I would go to the postmaster, but that hon. member thinks that Parliament is the place to make a fuss about the late arrival of one letter out of half a million sorted by the Cape Town post office every day.

†The hon. member also complained about overseas mail which is being sorted here in Cape Town. I can tell the hon. member that the problem is not ours; the fault lies on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean with the service from the United States. In several cases they have had problems with labour, especially at New Orleans where the containers are loaded on the ships. On account of those problems the mail simply arrives late in Cape Town. I think that is more or less all in this connection.

Will the hon. the Minister please answer the questions about the case? We have had no answer. Who is paying the costs and what are the costs?

The costs of the case?

Yes.

Need I repeat this now for the third time? The hon. member knows the provision in the relevant Act. Being a legal man he knows that provision.

What Act?

I even mentioned the name of the Act to him. Mr. Speaker, this is not the way to debate in Parliament. I have given the information to the hon. member on three occasions already and we are now wasting time.

*The hon. member for Kempton Park raised a matter which he discussed during the previous session as well, namely the question of the poaching of staff. This is something we must discuss from time to time, and we must sometimes discuss it with the private sector as well in a friendly atmosphere. The hon. member proposed that a levy be imposed on firms in the private sector as far as technical staff is concerned. All I can tell the hon. member is that this lies outside my domain. The hon. member should rather address his proposal to the hon. the Minister of Industries, Commerce and Tourism. However, it could lead to problems. I think one should rather maintain a good mutual understanding. In November, when the Government sector and the private sector meet again, we shall have to discuss these matters.

Mr. Speaker, before business was suspended for dinner, I was about to reply to the Third Reading speech of the hon. member for Umhlanga.

†The hon. member indicated in the course of his speech that the transfer of telephone services really does not entail any problem; there is no difficulty, as he put it. I merely tried to make the hon. member aware of the fact that apart from the installation of new telephone services during the course of a particular year, several hundreds of thousands of transfers must also be taken into account. According to my information, in some cases—not all cases—the transfer of a telephone service meets with more difficulty than the installation of a fairly new one.

Once again I merely tried to point out to the hon. member that we should gauge the extent of increased services in terms of new services and the transfer of services.

The hon. member said, as did hon. members of the official Opposition, that it did not make sense to compare our backlog with that of other countries. I wish to reiterate that we should compare our backlog with that of comparable countries or more or less comparable countries. What I did do in my speech this afternoon was to compare our backlog with first of all that of Spain which I think is a comparable country because it is a developing country and not a fully-developed country. I also compared our backlog with that of fully-developed countries such as France and Austria. It was not my intention to compare our situation with that of less developed countries such as the countries referred to by the hon. member for Hillbrow. I made those comparisons with the idea to point out that one can never be without a backlog. The backlog will increase occasionally and decrease occasionally. What is important is that we should be able to prove to the country that we have improved our services as we have done especially during the past two financial years.

On account of a conversation between the two of us in connection with what the hon. member for Durban Point had said yesterday, the hon. member for Umhlanga eventually challenged me. I do not quarrel with the hon. member. He read out to the House what had passed between the two of us. I now want to continue by quoting from Hansard. I said to the hon. member—

And I am on the point of doing just that. I made that promise and I was proved wrong. The hon. member for Durban Point said by way of interjection to me yesterday: “Have you ever given higher salaries …”

No, salary increases.

It amounts to the same. This is what he asked me: “Have you ever given increased salaries at a different date than that announced by the Public Service Commission?” I then replied by way of interjection: “I have given a higher percentage increase lately, in February.” Nevertheless, in the course of my speech when the hon. member interrupted me, perhaps on the spur of the moment I did not give the correct …

You did not think quickly enough, perhaps.

Oh, shut up! [Interjections.]

That is not a very elegant reaction.

Sir, we do not need the energy of the wind-mill here right now.

I am quite prepared to admit to the hon. member for Umhlanga that I was wrong. However, it relates to the same story; in other words, the need for co-ordination still exists. Although we can occasionally give higher increases, we, being part of the State’s machinery, have to co-ordinate with the Commission for Administration.

I hope the hon. member is happy. We understand each other. I made a promise earlier and I have fulfilled it now.

*The hon. member for Johannesburg West made an interesting speech about some of the research projects undertaken by the department in respect of training. I am glad that these points are also being emphasized to show how the department keeps abreast of developments in order to deal with the problems of training and recruitment, etc. [Interjections.] I should like to thank the hon. member for that.

The hon. member raised another point which I found interesting. He asked whether parents who were in the service of the Post Office could not also be used to do recruitment for the Post Office.

†I think the hon. member for Hillbrow also made this point this afternoon and asked how many children of Post Office officials actually entered the service of the Post Office. The hon. member has got a very valid point there. I said by way of an interjection to the hon. member for Hill-brow that hundreds of Post Office officials were actually the children of senior Post Office officials.

Will they still make the same decision today?

Oh yes! They make it everyday.

*I could mention an interesting example at the highest level. The present Postmaster-General has two sons, and one of them is in the service of the Post Office, while the other son is studying engineering on a Post Office bursary and working in the Post Office during his holidays. He is also going to join the service of the Post Office eventually. Similarly, the son of the Deputy Postmaster-General (Telecommunications) is a qualified engineer in the service of the Post Office. From my own knowledge of the Post Office, therefore, I could tell you about cases tonight …

[Inaudible.]

Order! The hon. member for Hillbrow must ask permission to put a question and must not keep on interjecting.

As far as the administrative staff is concerned, let me inform the hon. member for Hillbrow that I can give him the names of Post Office officials who are actually third generation Post Office officials. The same perhaps holds good for the S.A. Police, the S.A. Railways, etc. However, I am very proud that hundreds of children of Post Office officials have also entered the service of the Post Office.

*I want to thank the hon. member for Johannesburg West for this suggestion, therefore. I hope parents will act on it. As I said earlier today, the Post Office is actually one family, and its members are proud to work for the department, knowing that they are rendering a service to their country.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move—

The purpose of this short measure is, firstly, to remove the existing restrictions on the amount for which a single National Savings Certificate may be issued, so that one certificate may be issued for any investment up to the maximum amount that is allowed. As section 77(A)(2) of the Post Office Act reads at the moment, a single certificate cannot be issued for more than R2 000. This means that when someone wishes to invest the maximum amount, which is at present R15 000, in these certificates, eight separate certificates must be issued, i.e. seven of R2 000 and one of R1 000. This involves unnecessary work and causes the public great inconvenience.

In clause 1 of the Bill, therefore, it is being proposed that the existing restriction be deleted. There will then be issued a single certificate in any multiple of the basic unit, which in the current series of certificates is R50, up to the maximum amount of R15 000.

The second objective of the Bill is to do away with the existing requirements that a national certificate should be issued at a discount and should have on its face the value and date of maturity thereof. Instead, provision is being made, in the proposed new wording of section 77(A)(2), for the date on which, and the way in which interest is paid to be prescribed by regulation.

The provision that a certificate must be issued at a discount means that interest cannot be paid until the capital sum is paid back. In terms of such an arrangement, the interest yield consists of the discount at which the certificate is issued under its value. The value is only reached upon the expiry of the term of the certificate. In practice, it has in fact been possible for interest to be realized before the expiry of the full term, since the conditions of the various issues provided that a certificate could be paid back before expiry of its term provided it was kept for a minimum period after issue, which was one year for some interest rates and two years for others. In spite of this, the arrangement that interest was only realized upon repayment of the capital sum of a certificate made the investment less attractive, so it is desirable that there should not be such a restriction.

†Apart from provisions putting into effect the main objectives I have mentioned, the Bill contains additions to the Act that are merely consequential or intended to clarify the existing legal position without materially affecting any principle of the legislation. I do not think it is necessary for me to go into those details at this stage. The Bill also contains, in clause 3, a validation provision which is necessary to ensure that all existing issues of the National Savings Certificates are technically in order.

The amendments to the principal Act which are put forward in this Bill are intended to remove restrictions on issues of the National Savings Certificates that would have the effect of reducing the attractiveness of this investment facility. Over the years, since the introduction of these certificates, they were known as Union Loan Certificates. They were originally introduced in 1919. They have been administered by and have become intimately associated with the Post Office. Since the Post Office took over the issue of these certificates for its own account from the Treasury in 1974, they have been an important source of funds for the Post Offices capital expansion, and I am confident that the need for ensuring the continuous success of issues of these certificates will be appreciated by all.

Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House will support the Second Reading of this Bill. We see this chiefly as an administrative matter, and we certainly think that amending the present Act will assist administratively. The present legislation stipulates a limit of R2 000 per certificate. So if somebody wished to make use of the maximum amount of R15 000, which he would be entitled to do, he would have to purchase seven certificates plus a further certificate to make up the full amount. The amendment will enable the Post Office to issue one single certificate. We certainly think that will help administratively so we gladly support that provision.

The other provision changes the situation in regard to certificates issued at discount in terms of the Act as it stands at the moment. We can see that there are disadvantages in issuing such certificates at discount because, although the person gets the benefit of such a discount when the certificate is issued, he cannot claim the interest until the certificate in question actually matures. I think there is a need for a system of savings to allow a person to have an investment and, at the same time, earn the interest that is payable by the Post Office.

I think the transfer fees envisaged are rather small and, because such a small amount is involved, there should be no problem in legalizing the situation. Since the old law of 1919 does not really clarify the situation, I suppose what we are doing, to a large extent, is dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s.

This brings me to the validation clause, which again harks back to the old Act of 1919. There may well be series that have been issued which had to comply with the provisions of the Act as it stands at the moment, so in case there is any misinterpretation involved—which I am not sure there is, quite frankly—it is perhaps a good thing to validate the whole thing once and for all, though normally one must be very careful about validating provisions that actually go against the principle of good legislation. I think hon. members can understand that.

I think the proposed new section 77(A)(2) really deals with the regulations pertaining to the issuing of the certificates. In terms of the law as it stands at the moment, the hon. the Minister of Finance is involved in the amount that can be issued and the interest that can be paid. The envisaged legislation, however, goes further in that the regulations will now provide that—

I take it that means “with the approval of”—

That being so, one important object is achieved. One has always been worried about whether the Post Office is, in fact, competing with private enterprise and to what extent the Post Office offers benefits to the public that may compete with benefits in the private sector, thereby adversely affecting institutions such as building societies, in particular, which need money so desperately to provide housing. Control will now be vested in an entire issue, and the fact that the hon. the Minister of Finance is involved with the conditions, will allow him to weigh up the conditions involved, because he should know—in fact, we expect him to know—how such conditions would fit into the general economic pattern. If one does not exceed the limits of departmental policy in the sense that one does not compete for more than 5% of the funds available to the private sector, one could still ensure that one gave the public the best they could get within that 5% limit. Looking at the 8th series issued recently, one sees that this is a very attractive investment. An interest rate of 8,5% was applicable for the first two years, with 9% paid for the third year, 9,5% for the fourth year and 10% for the fifth year. This shows how attractive the series is. There is also the fact of tax-free benefits and also the additional incentive of making this applicable to individuals as such rather than specifically to taxpayers. This is something the hon. the Minister of Finance changed recently in connection with savings in building societies. We have no difficulty with this measure and we accordingly support the Second Reading.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the hon. member for Hill-brow is supporting this legislation. It certainly does not happen every day that we agree on these matters here. Naturally I, too, shall support this legislation, because it is, of course, my hon. Minister and my Government. [Interjections.] I, too, thank the hon. the Minister most sincerely for this excellent, splendid piece of work that has been done. This once again demonstrates to us that the Postmaster-General and the members of his top management not only look after their administration and ensure that unnecessary work is eliminated, but also look after the interests of the member of the general public, the investor. However, I also consider it necessary for the hon. the Minister to announce to South Africa once again, whether by way of Press, radio or television, how much our people are in a position to save. In this respect I should just like to refer to the Post Office annual report. Under the heading “Savings services”, on page 26 of the annual report, we note that there are in fact three kinds of savings facilities in the Post Office. The first of these is the current savings account. According to the Post Office annual report for the 1979-’80 financial year—and the present figures will not differ much from this—the amount then invested in current savings accounts was R231,7 million. In the second savings section, i.e. Savings Bank Certificates, an amount of R812,7 million was invested, whereas in the third section, that of National Savings Certificates, an amount of R191,3 million was invested. This amounts to a total of R1 235,7 million which the public saves by investing at the Post Office.

Now it is true that we are achieving a twofold aim in this respect. Members of the public, in particular those who have small investments—the poor, the pensioners, students, scholars, the beginners in life—invest money in the Post Office Savings Bank. These people are in the fortunate position of being able to draw money wherever they travel in South Africa. It may be as well if the hon. the Minister could just explain to this House how easy it is, so that the public at large, too, can take cognizance of this. I believe it is necessary that the Post Office receive a little more of this money.

The Post Office savings services comprise a mere 4,6% of the public’s total savings investments in all financial institutions. I honestly believe that 4,6% is too little. It ought to amount to at least between 5% and 6%. Consequently I believe that if we were able to increase this figure the Post Office would obtain money in a fair way—not for free, of course—in order to keep the postal services going. Furthermore, this is an easy way in which to obtain money from the public. By doing that we are not, of course, entering the sphere of other financial institutions, for example banks or building societies. They will lose no money in the process.

Finally there is another aspect to which I should like to refer. It concerns the question of National Savings Certificates. Every individual may invest R15 000 in National Savings Certificates. When a family consists of six members—father, mother and four children—each one of them may invest R15 000. This means that the family’s joint investment may amount to a maximum of R90 000. The same applies to the major investor. A splendid and fine aspect of this system is that the interest earned on such an investment is tax-free. It is as well for us to emphasize this fact. This is an investment which is useful to both the large and the small investor. People who, for example, invest in the Postal Savings Bank or elsewhere may subsequently transfer their money into this kind of investment.

When I say this I do not, of course, want to tread on the toes of the hon. the Minister of Finance. However, I have the public in mind, too. After all, my voters are all members of the public.

Finally, I just want to thank the hon. the Minister and the Post Office Administration for this splendid new arrangement by means of which administrative red tape is being eliminated. The hon. member for Hillbrow quite rightly pointed out all these aspects as well. We accept this with sincere gratitude and give the Second Reading of this Bill our wholehearted support.

Mr. Speaker, we in the NRP are supporting this measure. It is obviously a measure which will remove certain restrictions in order to make the National Savings Certificate more acceptable and more attractive and more popular once again. I had prepared myself to talk on the individual clauses contained in this Bill, but having listened to the hon. the Minister’s Second Reading Speech, as well as to the speeches by the hon. member for Hillbrow and the hon. member for Sunnyside, I believe all those points have been adequately covered. All the serious business has of course been done.

I should like therefore to address myself to this method of saving. In this regard I should like to ask the House to go back over the years with me. There must be many of us here who have similar memories of that time. I can remember that every Thursday I took my 4/2 to school and that on every fourth Thursday I received my Union Loan Certificate for 16/8. That was my first ever lesson in saving. I was told how after five years that certificate would be worth a pound.

And what a pound!

As someone interjected, it was a pound indeed. What a magnificent amount of money a pound was in the early 1930s. I think quite a few of the older members here will remember that. I believe that the old Union Loan Certificate was a wonderful way of teaching young people to save, although I do not want to suggest for a moment that the lesson got home to me. I cannot say that I stand here today as one who has saved in his life. Nevertheless, I think it is a wonderful lesson in thrift. That is how we were taught thrift as children. Possibly we should think of embarking again on this sort of programme of putting a certain amount aside on a weekly basis. We as children did not do it, but our parents did it for us and through this they taught us how to save. By putting a certain amount aside on a weekly basis, in a number of year’s time that will become R1, R5 or whatever the case may be.

I think that National Saving Certificates are a good way of saving. It is in truth a national thrift scheme. We welcome this measure because it certainly serves to streamline this scheme. We sincerely hope that the National Saving Certificate is going to start playing an increasingly important role in Government finance. We are pleased that the existing rather cumbersome method is now going to be brought up to date.

It is a pity that up to now the certificates have been used by the Post Office only for capital requirements. I should like to ask the hon. the Minister whether it is the intention of the Post Office to use money obtained in this way for other purposes or whether it will still in a sense be restricted in its utilization to capital requirements in the Post Office. We note that the Minister of Finance himself will now be taking a greater part in matters relating to the National Saving Certificates and we wonder whether perhaps it is not the intention of the Post Office and the Treasury to get their heads together in order to find other avenues of investment for these moneys. We look forward with interest to the replies the hon. the Minister will give.

Mr. Speaker, I really wish to thank the three hon. members who participated in this debate for their support. As the hon. member for Hillbrow quite rightly said, on the side of the Post Office we should be very careful not to compete with private enterprise at too high a level. In this regard he referred particularly to building societies. As I have indicated to hon. members this afternoon, it is necessary, particularly in this respect, for there to be co-ordination with the Minister of Finance, who has a global view of all the activities of other financial institutions.

I wish I could believe that.

The Post Office until now has merely desired to have its little slice of the cake in order to fund our capital programme. I am sorry that the hon. member for Bezuidenhout did not participate in the debate tonight, because he had some interesting things to say in a previous debate about the interest rate as far as National Saving Certificates are concerned. We must definitely take a fresh look at the situation. In that respect I agree with the hon. member and also with the hon. member for Sunny-side that perhaps, with a view to our increasing capital programme in the Post Office, the time has arrived for us to get a somewhat bigger slice of the cake than we have had until now. Therefore, I can inform the House that it is our intention to take up this matter with the Minister of Finance and his department with a view to issuing yet another series of National Saving Certificates in the future. Hon. members will recall that we made the present new series of National Savings Certificates available as from 1 March this year, and immediately there was a tremendous investment by the public, but it is only natural that it gradually slowed down as a result of competition from the building societies and other institutions. But I can inform hon. members that we intend having a fresh look at the situation.

*The hon. member for Sunnyside quite rightly pointed out that the savings services of the Post Office—at the moment we are only dealing with National Savings Certificates, it is true, but there are also savings bank accounts and other services— represented the field of investment of the small man. Hon. members will be surprised to know how much confidence the Post Office has earned over the years among the small investors in this area particularly among members of the Black community. They regard it as a safe field of investment and are quite prepared to entrust their investments to the Post Office. The issue of 1 March offers new attractions in terms of tax exemption and the extent of a family’s investments. I believe that this service should be popularized at all times so that it may remain the field of investment of the small man—I am not talking about large business undertakings.

†The hon. member for Umhlanga referred to our common childhood days and the weekly exercise of putting away something of what our fathers gave us in Union Loan Certificates, as they were called in those days. What wonderful days those were, and what a wonderful experience it was to make use of our savings afterwards. I agree with the hon. member that we should encourage our children once again to participate in these schemes thereby encouraging the habit of saving. The hon. member asked me whether the investments in National Savings Certificates will be used solely for financing the capital programme of the Post Office. That is more or less the understanding. If the time should arrive, as suggested by the hon. member for Bezuidenhout this afternoon, that we get hold of a bigger slice of the cake than we need, we can have another look at the situation. As I have indicated, however, up till now it has been the idea that this money should be the source of the funds which the Post Office needs for its capital programme.

*I wish once again to convey my sincere thanks to hon. members who participated in the debate for their support.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Bill not committed.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr. Speaker, in the first place I want to thank all the hon. members, who participated in the debate, for their contributions. In addition, I have to mention the exceptionally high level which was maintained during the Second Reading debate. Actually I think one ought to be proud that there are members who can debate on such a high level and who possess such a large measure of expertise on this subject. They are men who acquitted themselves of their task with great competence. Here and there, of course, there was a discordant note, but I shall come to that later.

The legislation which is being discussed here, and which deals with co-operatives, is of course of the utmost importance to agriculture in South Africa. The role which co-operatives play in agriculture in South Africa must not be underestimated. On that score I wish to agree with the hon. member for Durban Point. On previous occasions, too, I said that the Co-operative Societies Act was one of the cornerstones on which agriculture in South Africa rested and was built. I do not think that agriculture in South Africa could have developed to the extent to which it did if it had not been for the Co-operative Societies Act.

Let us consider a few examples. In the year 1980, produce with a total value of R4 581 million was handled by the cooperatives. Farming requisites, the total value of which was R1 626, were provided by the co-operatives. Services rendered amounted to R220 million. This gives us a total turn-over for co-operatives of R6 427 million in 1980. From this it is very clearly apparent that co-operatives are a very important provider of inputs and farming requisites in the agricultural sector.

At the same time the co-operative movement is probably the most important conductor of production means to the farmer from the industries. The co-operative is a carrier of supplies for the farmers. In remote areas in our country, far away from the great metropolises, from the factories in the cities, there is a co-operative which carries supplies which conveniently enable the farmer to conduct his farming operation.

A part which the co-operatives play, but for which they get very little credit, is the provision of credit to agriculture. The most important source from which co-operatives acquire their funds is the Land and Agricultural Bank. Can hon. members imagine for a moment how the Land Bank would be able to discharge its functions, how it would be able to control its credit to individual producers if we did not have such institutions as our co-operatives which accept responsibility for those funds, for they are in fact public funds? They accept responsibility for the collection of those funds, and they remain liable for those funds to the Land Bank.

At a great risk.

And at an exceptionally great risk, as the hon. member for Ventersdorp has rightly observed.

I also want to mention—I think we owe this to the co-operatives—the assistance which co-operatives rendered to my department and the State during the emergency situations which prevailed in disaster areas. There, too, the co-operatives play an extremeley important part as one of the instruments which are used to make assistance available to our farmers.

The fact that co-operatives are dealing effectively with the funds given to them by the Land Bank for providing farmers with credit and the fact that co-operatives seldom if ever find themselves in financial difficulties, coupled with the fact that they operate at very low administrative costs, make it possible for the Land Bank to lend funds at such low cost, as a result of which the Land Bank never really loses any money through the co-operatives.

In this debate—and this upset me a little—there was excessive emphasis by the official Opposition on the priviledged positior of co-operatives. Let us suppose that a person who was not well informed and who did not listen carefully to the hon. members on this side nor—I wish to add at once—to the hon. member for Durban Point, had been present here. Surely such a person would have gained a completely erroneous impression. I am the last person who would say that the hon. member for Durban Point was a “boerehater”. [Interjections.] The hon. member adopted a very positive standpoint, and I want to thank him for doing so. It was a responsible standpoint, which was based on merit and not on prejudice. [Interjections.]

One should not overlook the fact that there are a great many disadvantages attached to co-operatives. When I was listening to those hon. members, I got the impression that to be a co-operative was to be just this side of paradise. It was not pointed out that co-operatives are institutions with limited objects. They are limited in regard to the sphere in which they may enter into transactions. In the statutes of a co-operative it is laid down that it may only conduct transactions with its own members and not with anyone.

Co-operatives are restricted in respect of the interest which they may pay on shares. A co-operative may only pay out a maximum of 8% to its share-holders. Fortunately this has now been increased to 15%. Nevertheless this remains an important restriction which is being imposed on a co-operative, and it has a detrimental effect on its ability to attract capital, because in these times in which we are living at present a return of 8% is very unattractive.

The field of activity of a co-operative is limited. It may establish branches and depots only with the approval of the Minister. Only bona fide farmers may become members of an agricultural co-operative.

One point which is conveniently not mentioned is that the shares which a farmer takes out in a co-operative do not appreciate as normally happens with shares on the share market. There is no growth in a co-operative share. Its nominal value remains its real value. Nor is such a share freely negotiable. One cannot go to share-market with it tomorrow.

Another very important restriction as far as co-operatives are concerned is on their ability to acquire capital, for they cannot, as in the case of the non-co-operative sector, go to the Stock Exchange.

I want to refer to a further point which is very important. Although the liability of a member of a co-operative is limited to the payment of the nominal value of his shares which he holds, as well as those which he has not yet made paid-up, he, together with the other members, remains liable to the Land Bank for loans negotiated by the co-operative from the Land Bank. Even if a particular member has met all his obligations to the co-operative, he nevertheless remains liable for such loans negotiated by the co-operative. If the co-operative finds itself in difficulties, each individual member remains liable to the Land Bank for any outstanding amount, on the basis of transactions which he conducted in the past with the co-operative. Hon. members opposite omit to mention this.

They omit to mention these tremendous restrictions which have been imposed on co-operatives, but they blow up the few privileges which co-operatives enjoy out of all proportion. I want to state quite bluntly this evening that I think it is extremely unfair to the farmers and to the co-operative movement that the hon. members should adopt a standpoint here which is conveyed from here to the general public and creates the impression that co-operatives are a kind of special pet which is wrapped in cottonwool for the chosen agriculturists in this country. I take that omiss of the hon. members.

It is petty politicking. [Interjections.]

However, I do not want to exert unnecessary pressure on the hon. member for Wynberg, because I appreciate his problem. He has people in his party, people like the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central, and to me it sounds as though the hon. member does not have much sympathy for the co-operative movement …

But the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central belongs to four cooperatives.

I want to tell the hon. member for Bezuidenhout that if the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central belongs to four co-operatives, he must please ask him to join a few more to see whether that will not make him more sympathetic towards co-operatives. [Interjections.]

I want to take this opportunity to congratulate the hon. member for Heilbron on his maiden speech. [Interjections.] The hon. member made a very neat speech and I think his constituency can be very proud of him. He was very witty. The hon. member said that he already felt as though he had undergone a physiological change here, because he was afraid that when he resumed his seat, he could perhaps be sitting on his brains. However, from what I heard the hon. member say, he need have no such fear, and we look forward to his ensuing speeches in this House.

The hon. member stated that cooperatives have a profit motive, in exactly the same way as companies do, as the non-co-operative sector does. He was entirely correct on that score. A very important principle in the co-operative movement which that hon. member singled out was the fact that voting rights are based on membership, in other words every member has only one vote. Voting rights in a co-operative are not determined by the number of shares or by the volume of business a particular member does with the co-operative. I want to tell the hon. member that I endorse that principle fully …

One man, one vote!

… precisely because of my great sympathy for the smaller farmers in South Africa who form the backbone of our country.

Hear, hear!

I want to congratulate the hon. member for Heilbron on that standpoint which he adopted here.

The hon. members opposite made a few wild allegations.

†I want to come to the hon. member for Bezuidenhout. [Interjections.] He delivered the most amazing speech as far as certain aspects of co-operatives are concerned. The hon. member said, inter alia, “I wish that I in my private business could have this deduction allowance, because then I would never pay any tax.” I think that is a sweeping statement. [Interjections.] I will substantiate that point of view. The hon. member also said, “Bonuses distributed by co-ops to members are deductible for tax purposes.” He also said: “An investment allowance of 20% on the cost of certain storage buildings brought into … on or before 30 June 1984 is allowed to co-ops.” He named quite a number of tax deductions allowed to co-ops. Further he said: “Amounts repaid on certain loans are deductible for tax purposes.”

The hon. member’s whole attitude—at least, that is how it seems to me—is that he has made a new discovery. If he however, had taken the trouble to read the Second Reading speech of the hon. Minister of Finance when he introduced the 1977 Income Tax Bill, he would have found the motivations fully set out there. For the benefit of the House I should just like to quote what my hon. colleague said in 1977. It is most interesting what he said. He dealt with all the questions raised by the hon. member for Bezuidenhout, and I want to quote from column 11132 of the Hansard of 22 June 1977.

*On that occasion the hon. the Minister of Finance said the following—

1. (a) the capital structure and relationship of share-holders to the co-operative, and
2. (b) the way in which the surplus or profit of a co-operative is distributed among share-holders.

This is what I said a moment ago—

The Minister of Finance then went on to say—

and this is the crux of the matter—

This is crystal clear and fundamentally, is absolutely correct. The hon. the Minister of Finance then went on to say—

Quite right.

According to the hon. member, however, it was a kind of “tax saving”. I shall quote the Minister of Finance further in this connection—

In column 11182, with reference to a question asked by the hon. member for Yeoville on 23 June, the hon. the Minister of Finance said the following—

And now the hon. member must listen carefully—

The hon. the Minister said “in full”; consequently there is no deduction, nor a 33⅓% exemption, as in the case of dividends. They are fully taxable in the hands of the share-holder. Just to emphasize this point: If those members of a co-operative and not the co-operative as a company had paid tax, it would have been a tax of 42%. However, if its members are well-to-do-people, it could mean that those funds in the member’s hands are 50% taxable. These are the facts, and this is something which the hon. member for Bezuidenhout did not consider very carefully. [Interjections.]

I cannot devote all my time to explaining this question, but I strongly recommend that the hon. member should read the rest of the Hansard of 22 June 1977, starting at column 11134, to get an idea of the hon. the Minister’s concession to co-operatives in respect of storing facilities, etc. Then he will see that the private sector can also receive that rebate, because the private sector also has that privilege, except of course for certain privileges which were granted to co-operatives as a transitional concession. If the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central was a manufacturer, for example, which included the milling business, he would have received precisely the same concessions as those received by the co-operatives. Precisely the same. That is why I cannot understand why the hon. member kicked up such a fuss about this so-called benefitting or favouring of co-operatives.

He understands nothing about co-operatives.

I do not have the time to react to all the points, but I should like to react to a few of the crucial ones.

The entire Government and I have been accused of not having kept our word because the lien has been retained in the present legislation, and has even been extended. However, I should like to refer hon. members to the Explanatory Memorandum on the Co-operatives Bill (W.P. 7—’81). In paragraph 4.2(h) it is stated very clearly—

Are hon. members opposed to the retention of the lien in the new legislation?

No.

That hon. member is therefore not opposed to it. Are hon. members then opposed to the expansion of the lien in the present legislation?

In respect of spares and repair services, certainly.

The hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central says he is when it comes to spares and repair services. Could the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central therefore tell me whether he is against the inclusion of electricity in this.

No.

There we have it now. The entire Government and I are being accused of not having kept our word, because we extended the provisions of the lien.

With private enterprise.

Wait a minute. I know the hon. member maintains that private enterprise was not consulted.

What private enterprise supplies electricity?

Let us go a little further. [Interjections.]

Order!

That hon. member and the hon. member for Wynberg said that the Government had a moral obligation …

I said that.

Oh, that hon. member said that. [Interjections.] The point is, however, that they are opposing the extension of the lien, when it comes to spares and repair services. However, I did not extend the hen to include electricity as well. Consequently, where is the principle which is being maintained here? [Interjections.]

Mr. Speaker, can the hon. the Minister tell me what sections of private enterprise supply electricity to the farms?

That is not the point. [Interjections.]

But it is the point. [Interjections.]

Their only interest therefore lies in whether or not the non-co-operative sector is affected. [Interjec tions.] However, they criticized me about the principle of the extension of the lien.

As it affects private enterprise.

It was said that I had a moral obligation, and I was criticized on the principle of the extension of the lien. [Interjections.] These are the facts. It is stated in Hansard. [Interjections.] It is stated in Hansard.

With private enterprise.

It is stated in Hansard. Hon. members can say what they like now, but these are the facts.

Mr. Speaker, may I please ask the hon. the Minister a question?

Hon. members know that I gladly reply to questions, but I should just to complete my argument first. We come now to the fact that I am extending the lien in respect of electricity. Hon. members have no objection to that. Therefore they are not being consistent. [Interjections.] When those hon. members were speaking, I listened to them even though it was frequently difficult to remain calm. Now the hon. members must give me a chance. I shall not be too rough on them. [Interjections.] The hon. members are distorting the principle. They concede that they do not oppose the extension of the lien in respect of electricity, but that is to the benefit of the farmer. However, has the extension of the lien to spares and repair work is also to the benefit of the farmer but in that respect they are siding against the farmers. [Interjections.] The word “Boerehaters” is no longer allowed in Parliament, because it is unparliamentary …

Order! The hon. the Minister is wrong. The word has been permissible again for a long time.

Is the word permissible again? [Interjections.] Sir, if you had asked me to withdraw, I would have said that those hon. members were “boerehaters” in the agricultural sense of the word. [Interjections.] They have left the farmers in the lurch, because they have sided with the non-co-operative sector against the co-operative sector. [Interjections.] They cannot tell me that it is on the basis of principle that we are not extending the lien, because the principle does after all apply in respect of electricity. In that case, those hon. members concede that it may be done. However, when it comes to the non-co-operative sector, those hon. members decided that it was in their best political interests to oppose this clause. That is the point, and they cannot get away from it.

Your argument is founded on a false premise.

It is a fact.

The farmers voted for the HNP.

Oh, please, Mr. Speaker, when I see the hon. member for Pietermaritzburg North, a profound feeling of sympathy and pity for him comes over me.

Oh, come on, Pietie, you are fond of me, aren’t you?

If that hon. member would only keep his mouth shut in Parliament, his image would improve a hundredfold. But every time the hon. member opens his mouth he confirms all the nasty feelings we have about him. [Interjections.] I do not of course wish to quarrel with the hon. member, because it is his democratic right to make a fool of himself in public. He can continue to do so if he wishes, but I just wanted to give him some advice.

You are setting him a good example.

I want to discuss the question of the lien further. What precisely does this involve? It is concerned with the provision of production credit to the farmer. That is why we have a lien clause. What happened in respect of the extension of the lien to electricity, spares and repair work? The Jacobs Committee considered the position of the farmer. I wish to convey my special appreciation to this committee, which is a standing committee, for the services it is rendering to agricultural in general.

It is a good committee.

The hon. member for Greytown says it is a good committee. I am in complete agreement with him.

The Jacobs Committee recommended to the hon. the Minister of Finance and to me that the Land Bank should also finance spares and repair services; in other words, that it should be possible for co-operatives to finance repair work and spares by way of credit. The committee also recommended that the financing of electricity through co-operatives should also be possible. The Government accepted that recommendation of the Jacobs Committee since it was in the interests of the farmer. Then the Land Bank, which works with public funds, indicated that they concurred with that, provided we extended the lien to electricity, spares and repair services so that they could have security.

I want to tell hon. members of the PFP that I appreciate their support in respect of the extension of the lien to electricity. I am very grateful for that. I want to say this so that it may be placed on record. I am not an ungrateful person. [Interjections.] However, I do take it amiss of them for opposing the extension of the lien to spares and repair services.

The hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central kicked up a great fuss here about the issue of the lien. He posed the hypothetical case of a tractor which breaks down after it had been purchased by means of a hire-purchase agreement. When it broke, the co-operative supplied the spares. He wanted to know what would happen to the tractor if the purchaser was no longer able to pay for it. I want to give that hon. member a piece of advice. His arguments were replied to very adequately by the hon. member for Ventersdorp. I want to advise the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central to read clause 173 again, but this time he should try to understand it.

Is he able to?

I do not wish to comment on that.

The hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central also mentioned the question of differentiated interest rates in respect of loans to co-operatives. I want to make it very clear that I am not laying down the interest rates charged by the Land Bank in the Co-operatives Bill.

No …

It is a question which is related to the Land Bank Act or to the policy adopted by the Land Bank. The fact of the matter is that the Land Bank has already adopted that policy.

I agree.

However, the hon. member is asking me to write into the Bill that the co-operatives may, in respect of these activities, negotiate loans at a fixed low interest rate, while loans in the case of durable production commodities, etc., have to be negotiated at a higher interest rate. Is that the essence of the hon. member’s suggestion?

Correct. It must be market-related.

Sir, suppose we were to insert in the Co-operatives Bill that …

No, we never asked for that.

But the hon. member says that he wants it in the Bill.

I shall expand on that in the Committee Stage.

But the essence of your suggestion is that two interest rates must apply, not so?

Yes, two interest rates.

And I must put that into the Bill, not so?

I have suggested a way of doing it. [Interjections.]

No, Sir, the hon. member cannot now try to run away. He suggested that I should include it in this Bill.

You make your speech and I shall make mine. [Interjections.]

You see, Sir, the hon. member is now running away. He suggested that I include in this Bill two interest rates. If I am wrong the hon. member can correct me in the Committee Stage.

It is recorded in his Hansard.

That is correct. It is recorded in his Hansard.

I just want to tell the hon. member that I do not think it is a very clever suggestion. If I were to insert in the co-operatives legislation that a co-operative should pay the higher interest rate—let us say for the construction of buildings, because that is the position today—and say it had to pay the 12% interest rate …

Probably to the Mercedes Benz agency.

The fact of the matter, however, is that there are some cooperatives which, now that the new policy of the Land Bank is being applied in terms of which co-operatives may negotiate loans at market-related interest rates for certain purposes from the Land Bank, are able to borrow money more cheaply from the private sector.

[Inaudible.]

I can prove it to the hon. member.

Now the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central wants me to write into the legislation that co-operatives shall for those purposes borrow money at that specific interest rate. What the hon. member is actually suggesting is that co-operatives should, in regard to certain activities, make things impossibly expensive for themselves. Surely this is the essence of that suggestion which the hon. member made.

I want to go further and even suggest that the hon. member for Port Elizabeth Central gives me the impression that he does not have much time for co-operatives. I regret to have to say this, because I understand that the hon. member is himself a farmer. I do not think that the farmers will be very proud of that standpoint which the hon. member is adopting.

Furthermore, I am being asked to refer this legislation to a Select Committee. Allow me, Mr. Speaker, to tell the hon. members in all fairness and quite candidly that that is nothing but a delaying tactic in order to get this legislation shelved. [Interjections.] We have been working on this legislation for a long time. The Steenkamp Commission brought out its report as long ago as 1967. I want to make it clear now that it will not be possible to achieve unanimity among all the separate groups by referring the matter to a Select Committee. This entire piece of legislation was preceded by many years of negotiations. In 1977 a committee of departmental heads was constituted, which deliberated and argued and which heard the standpoints of the various interested groups, the non-co-operative as well as the co-operative sector. This resulted in a package agreement which was negotiated between the Minister of Finance and the then Minister of Agriculture. As far as that package agreement is concerned, it is no use pretending now that total consensus was achieved. Something like that was simply not possible. This is merely a compromise which has been reached between the two Ministers concerned. It was a question of give and take.

Sometimes to the detriment of the co-operatives.

Yes, sometimes to the detriment of the co-operatives.

The co-operatives accepted tax liability. Surely that was greatly to their detriment. Then the Cabinet decided that, after all those years, it accepted the package agreement.

The negotiations which preceded the package agreement are now being accepted by some hon. members of the Opposition as undertakings which were given and which would be contained in the package agreement. I wish to emphasize once again that the package agreement is the result of a compromise which was eventually reached, and one which was approved by the Cabinet. Consequently I want to say in all honesty that I am not in any way prepared to allow this matter to be delayed any further. This matter is now before Parliament, and Parliament will now give its verdict on this legislation. [Interjections.]

I have already said that the co-operatives have been paying tax since 1977. They have been paying market-related interest rates in respect of activities such as those spelt out in the explanatory memorandum since 1979. Their field of activity is still being limited. Must I now expect the co-operatives to wait ad infinitum until the legislation is amended? For four years they have been paying tax, but they have not been receiving the benefits of the package agreement.

Let us see what improvements this legislation entails for the co-operatives. In terms of the legislation they are now able to deal with all farming requisites. They are now able to establish subsidiary companies and their right to do so is no longer in dispute. It is now being laid down in this legislation, so that there need be no further doubts on this score. They are able to establish pension funds and medical schemes or act as agents for such schemes. The entire administration of the co-operative movement is being streamlined by means of the redrafting and adaptation brought about by this legislation. Certain meetings are now being given statutory sanction, and ministerial approval for them is no longer required. Short-term insurance may also be conducted now. The interest rate on shares is being raised by this legislation from 8% to 15%. This holds great financial implications for the farmer. Differentiated bonuses from profits may now be paid out to co-operatives. As a result of the extension of the lien, co-operatives may now finance farmers’ electricity, spares and repair work. Just think what it means if they may finance the provision of electricity. Trading co-operatives and agricultural co-operatives may now be converted without being liquidated.

In spite of all these advantages for co operatives the hon. members of the Opposition are asking for the Bill to be referred to a Select Committee first. Now I shall tell hon. members exactly what would happen if that were done. As soon as I have appointed a Select Committee, those hon. members will say that we are already sitting three nights a week and that they cannot finish during the present session. At the end of the session they will tell me that they have to be converted into a commission. And if the commission does not complete its task, they will tell me next session that Parliament has such a heavy programme that I must give them until after the session. Then, before we know it, this legislation has been delayed for a further year or two. Consequently I do not want to be unwise, I think we have waited long enough. I am not prepared to hold these advantages for the co-operatives in abeyance any longer. I am now adopting a standpoint, and I am not in any way prepared to appoint a Select Committee.

However, I do not want to be unfair. I always say there is a place for the cooperatives sector and a place for the non-co-operatives sector in our set-up here in South Africa. There is a place for everyone, and the hon. member for Bezuidenhout knows it. That is why I am quite prepared to appoint a liaison committee under the chairmanship of the Registrar of Co-operatives, on which the non-co-operative sector and the co-operative sector have representation, and which is able from time to time to raise complaints with and make recommendations to me. I am not prepared to appoint a watchdog committee which tells me how I should do my job. Nor am I prepared to create a statutory institution which has a veto right concerning the actions of this Government. However, I am prepared to give that committee the status of a standing committee so that there may be full consultation, so that discussions may take place and so that any problems may be raised there. I am prepared to do that, and commit myself to doing so, but I am not in any way prepared to go further than that.

I want to thank hon. members who participated and they must pardon me if I did not refer to everyone. Time is limited and I just want to say that I wish to congratulate hon. members once again on the standard of the debate which was conducted here.

Question put: That all the words after “That” stand part of the Question,

Mr. Speaker, I move—

Section 3 of the Mountain Catchment Areas Act, 1970 (Act 63 of 1970), empowers the Minister to declare certain directions to be applicable on land situated in declared mountain catchment areas, inter alia, with reference to the destruction of vegetation which, in his opinion, is intruding vegetation. However, at the moment the effective control of intruding vegetation within mountain catchment areas is being complicated because the Minister does not have the power to combat the cultivation of such vegetation on land immediately outside the borders of the declared mountain catchment area. The good work that is being done within mountain catchment areas with regard to the destruction of intruding vegetation at a great deal of expense and considerable trouble, is being cancelled out to a certain extent by this state of affairs. In practice, the combating of intruding vegetation within mountain catchment areas will therefore be more economical and can be accomplished with greater efficiency if a relatively large territory directly adjacent to a mountain catchment area can be cleared of intruding vegetation from time to time. Therefore, the aim of clause 2 of the Bill that is before the House is to extend the Minister’s powers with regard to the control of intruding vegetation in order to enable him by means of directions to have the intruding vegetation on land that is situated within a distance of 5 km from the border of mountain catchment areas, destroyed, in those cases where it may be deemed necessary and where it cannot be accomplished in any other way.

It is realized that if directions are declared to be applicable with reference to the destruction of intruding vegetation on land outside mountain catchment areas, it may place responsibilities on the owners or occupants of such land, together with financial implications. However, hon. members will note that section 10 of the Act already makes provision for granting financial aid to, inter alia, the owners and occupants of land with regard to expenses that they have to incur in order to comply with the provisions of a direction in terms of the Act. The existing provision with regard to financial aid will therefore in the nature of things also be applicable to land outside a mountain catchment area upon which directions with regard to the destruction of intruding vegetation can be declared to be applicable in terms of the Act.

The amendment to section 12 of the Act which is being made in clause 4 of the Bill, will enable the Minister, in the case of declared mountain catchment areas, to perform any acts himself in connection with the destruction of intruding vegetation on land outside a mountain catchment area on which a direction is declared to be applicable, and will also make it possible for such land to be entered for the purposes of the Act, or for access thereto to be gained. Therefore, it does not necessarily follow that the act of destroying intruding vegetation on such land has to be performed by the owner or occupant of the land himself.

In order to make the advisory committees with regard to declared mountain catchment areas more representative of all persons and bodies who have an interest in such an area, the amendment contained in clause 3 of the Bill envisages making provision for the representation of organizations and bodies by means of the appointment of members, by such bodies to the advisory committees. However, it will rest with the Minister to determine which bodies have an interest in a specific mountain catchment area or in mountain catchment areas in general, and the bodies concerned will also be specifically appointed by him. In the nature of things, more representative advisory committees will lead to the more efficient management and utilization of mountain catchment areas. In addition, the measure contains the further important benefit of simplifying the administration of the legislation, in the sense that it will not be necessary for the Minister to make new appointments to advisory committees from time to time, whenever there is a change of incumbents of specific positions in the bodies that have been appointed.

Clauses 1 and 5 of the Bill provide for a few rectifications and textual improvements, most of which became necessary as a result of the rationalization of the Public Service. The clauses concerned are self-explanatory and therefore require no further explanation.

Mr. Speaker, we are in favour of the principal Act, the Mountain Catchment Areas Act of 1970, because we believe that this is one of the few conservation Acts that really has some teeth. Under the principal Act the department can draw up a comprehensive management plan for a mountain catchment area and in terms of that plan take meaningful financial steps to prevent soil erosion, to protect and treat the natural vegetation and to destroy intruding vegetation. In particular it gives the Minister and the department powers not only over State land, but over private land as well. For those reasons we on this side of the House are very much in favour of the Mountain Catchment Areas Act. I might just say in passing that our disappointment with the Act relates to the fact that, in our opinion, the department has not declared enough mountain catchment areas. In the Western Cape, for example, only the Cedar-berg, Koue Bokkeveld and Langeberg West mountain catchment areas have been declared. We feel that the powers granted to the department under this Act should be used on a wider scale, but perhaps we can come back to that under the Vote.

As far as the Bill is concerned, we are in favour of it, although I must confess that we cannot quite grasp why it is necessary to have an amending Bill to declare a 5 km buffer zone when the Act itself seems to provide the necessary powers to extend the boundaries of a mountain catchment area. Therefore it does not appear that one needs an amending Bill for this purpose. The principal Act gives the Minister the power to declare an area, to erect beacons and to change the boundaries of any mountain catchment area by way of notice in the Government Gazette. So it would seem to us that one could cover as much territory as one would need to, in terms of the existing Act, without the buffer zone, but nevertheless we bow to the department’s expertise in this regard. If it is felt that the so-called buffer zone must be written into the law, so be it. We are happy, because we feel that this Bill extends the conservation powers of the department, and wherever one can extend conservation powers, if I might say so, we are right behind the Government.

If the House would just indulge me for a little longer, I should like to say something else about this amending Bill. As a member of a Western Cape constituency, I have a very special interest in the implications of this Bill. It seems to me that this Bill can be used on a wider scale—particularly if one declares further mountain catchment areas—to fight two of the main enemies of conservationists in this area, namely hakea and pinus pinaster, which are infesting some of the most beautiful parts of the Western Cape. I am referring here specifically to the fynbos. To those hon. members who are not familiar with the fynbos, let me inform them that this is normally known as the Cape heath and protea species. Botanists refer to it as the Cape floristic kingdom. Hon. members may be interested to know that the Cape floristic kingdom is one of the six botanical kingdoms of the world. The biggest of the botanical kingdoms covers 42% of the earth’s land surface. It is known as the northern boreal floral kingdom covering most of the Northern Hemisphere. One of the six floral kingdoms is our own fynbos, which covers only 0,04% of the world’s land surface. It is, for the most part, found here in the Western Cape. It is what I would describe as our precious botanical heritage, our special obligation to the botanical world, and it falls only in this Western Cape of ours. It is under threat, in fact under serious threat. Of 39 botanical species that have become extinct in recent times—in other words have disappeared from the face of the earth for ever—36 occurred here in the Western Cape, and 35 of them right in the fynbos area. So anything this House can do to help protect this fynbos, this unique heritage of ours, will receive the support of this side of the House.

What are those figures again?

39 species have become extinct. 36 of them were in the Western Cape and 35 of those 36 were in the fynbos area. Let me tell the hon. member for Maitland, who seems to be very interested in this, that the fynbos is the richest of the floral kingdoms. At the last count in 1978, 8 550 species had been identified, and of these 6 252 or 73% are found nowhere else in the world but here. This unique little arboreal kingdom of ours covered 46 000 km² at one stage. Today it is down to 18 000 km².

Six main threats have been identified, but I shall not dwell at length on all of them in the discussion of this Bill. The main threat, however, is alien vegetation. 24% of the fynbos is infested with alien vegetation. So we can only thank the hon. the Minister and the department very much indeed for the powers they have made available, in terms of this legislation, to act against the alien vegetation that is killing our fynbos. That is why it gives me great pleasure to say that this side of the House supports this Bill with acclamation.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the fact that the hon. member for Constantia is supporting this amending Bill. It is an essential amendment that we welcome, because it enables the department to carry out its activities successfully. It also simplifies the activities. Provision is being made in the amendment for notice to be given to owners of land adjacent to that of the department. The department may give them written notice, or notice by means of the Gazette in order to announce the right of access. The farmers will then have the opportunity to have the department as a neighbour, and I think they have a very good neighbour.

It is essential for the department to enlarge its territory somewhat, in order to facilitate carrying out its tasks. The mountain catchment area also serves as a sponge for the conduction of water to our streams. However, when those areas become too densely covered by old plants and are overloaded by dead plant material, it has a disadvantageous effect on the process of the conduction of water. For that reason certain experiments are in progress, for instance by means of a programme of burning, to burn the excess plant material so that there can be a better conduction of water, and in the second place, a continual renewal plant growth. Another risk when such a compaction of old plant material occurs, is that fires of a tremendously high intensity may break out, fires which can cause a tremendous amount of damage.

The hon. member for Constantia referred to two particular invader plants. One of them was the hakea. Here in my hand I have an example of the hairy hakea. It is an ugly invader, if I can call it that. It is fairly hardy and has a very strong grip in mountain areas in particular. The hon. member for Constantia also referred to the sparden, a tree which is fairly common on Table Mountain. However, I want to refer to another invader. I too have brought an example with me, and with your permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to show it to hon. members.

Hon. members will agree with me that one could possibly confuse this plant with a wig. It is as hairy and as light in colour as the heads of some hon. members of the official Opposition. It is also just as troublesome as they are. [Interjections.] Now this is not the sparden.

Take it out so that we can see it.

It is Nic’s wig. [Interjections.]

Mr. Speaker, those hon. members are irresponsible. In actual fact I may not take it out here.

Yes, you may.

I may not. If I do so, I may spread some of the seed.

Do so, so that it can push you people on the opposite side out. [Interjections.]

This is an example of the nasella tussock. Its name is nasella tussock (nasella-polgras), but it could just as well have been “nasella-Proggras”. [Interjections.] It is of no use whatsoever.

One cannot even bum it.

That is correct. One cannot even bum it. Nor will any animal eat it. It is a very dangerous thing, much more dangerous than the sparden. The sparden is still of some use, but this fellow is of no use whatsoever.

Now I must address a warning to our people. A farmer who notices this nasella tussock on his farm, is not going to sleep easy that night. Hon. members who are interested in our fynbos will see this year, if the cold does not increase, what our floral kingdom and the fynbos, vygies at Bokbaai and other areas are going to look like. However, if nasella is going to take over the area, I want to tell hon. members that the wealth of flora will come to an end.

I have a book here that was published last year. It concerns the invader plants. In this book it is mentioned that nasella tussock has taken over certain areas in the Eastern Cape. 40 000 hectares have already been taken over by the nasella in that area of the country. This nasella tussock is also found on the slopes of Table Mountain at the moment. I think the hon. member for False Bay has already taken people there to see the intrusion there. It is a nasty plant, that spreads extremely rapidly, and which has no value whatsoever. It is very, very expensive to eradicate it. It can only be eradicated by teamwork. Keeping this plant under control, really gives the department headaches. Last week we had two tourists from West Germany here as our guests. They also visited Parliament and listened to a debate here. What struck them, was the discipline that prevails in this highest Council Chamber of our nation. However, what impressed them about our country, was not the squatters. Unlike the Progs, they were not interested in the squatters. What interested them, was the profusion of flowers in our country, and in particular, the proteas here in the Cape. This is a unique wealth in our country. It is a wealth that we should care for and protect and make known to the outside world. Since the department in particular is interested in this sphere, we know that the department also enjoys the co-operation of other organizations, the Botanical Society, etc.

I have here in my hand another book that I should like to show hon. members. It is the Namakwaland en Clanwilliam se Vetplant-blomme reeks No. 1. It is being introduced this weekend at the flowershow at Clanwilliam by amongst others, the hon. the Minister of Tourism, Dr. Dawie de Villiers. These are articles which these people have produced in co-operation with the province. They are brilliant articles in the interest of making our plant life known and preserving it.

I want to conclude by referring briefly to an interesting piece of information that I encountered. On one occasion we visited Portugal and there are olive trees on the hill where Henry’s St. George’s Castle stands, and according to tradition some of those olive trees were planted by Henry during the 12th century when he drove the Moors out of southern Europe. A wooden sign had been put on one of those olive trees with a Portuguese text upon it. I took a colour photo of the sign and brought it back to South Africa. The Portugese ambassador was kind enough to have it translated by his staff. The olive means something special to me. It makes one think of timelessness. The centuries make no impression upon it. It is a humble, modest tree, but a tree with a significant message. The following words were on the sign—I read them as they were translated—

This is the language of the tree. That is why we appreciate the fact that the hon. the Minister with his department and officials have introduced this Bill in order to maintain our natural wealth.

Mr. Speaker, we on these benches will support the Bill in that we see it as a positive measure, a measure to streamline certain definitions. We also see it as a measure to meet problems that are raising their heads in the catchment areas.

I wish to suggest, if I may, to the hon. the Minister that he consider at this stage an amendment to the proposed section 3(2)(a) as contained in clause 2. We suggest that after the word “Gazette” the word “or” should be replaced with “and”.

Would you repeat that please?

Subsection (2)(a) of the proposed section 3 reads—

I would suggest that the word “or” be altered to “and”.

Mr. Speaker, the question of intruding vegetation is a factor which I think concerns nearly every catchment area in the country. In this regard I am particularly concerned about the intrusion of undesirable vegetation in the Drakensberg areas of Natal. Here we are confronted with a situation where silver wattle and bramble are encroaching gradually year by year in these catchment areas and in the adjacent areas. It is for that reason that we on this side accept and welcome the reference in the Bill to an area within 5 km from the boundary of a catchment area. As far as the grassveld catchment areas where burning takes place over a period of two to three years are concerned, I would suggest that the department takes a good look at the effects this may be having on soil erosion in the catchment areas. There is a strong feeling that by not burning regularly and allowing these natural grasses to grow rank, the wildlife and the sweeter, and possibly weaker types of grass are being affected detrimentally. There is also a feeling that this is causing erosion, and a better system of planning in relation to the burning of these areas could help to obviate what might become a very serious problem in the future. We support this Bill.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Mooi River who has just sat down spoke about controlled burning. I do not think there is any question at all that controlled burning, certainly in many parts of the country, is absolutely essential, let alone a good thing to do. In this part of the world it is certainly part of the whole cycle and controlled burning is practised by the department in its forestry areas. As for the hon. member’s suggestion, I do not want to comment on it because the hon. the Minister will comment on it in good time. I would, however, say that it would probably be good practice to let the owners know as well as publicizing the matter in the Government Gazette. Whether one should, however, make that peremptory, I am not sure, because very often the owners of mountain fastnesses are not well known. In my experience, many of these owners are not resident on the land and have no address. Therefore, it might be difficult in practice, but I am quite sure that the department will be able to look at it and that the hon. the Minister will reply to it.

In the course of what I have to say, I should also like to reply to a few of the comments made by the hon. member for Constantia. I think it is wonderful that on a nice spring evening like this, all the hon. members in the House are so much in agreement. I think that augurs well for conservation in general and also says much for the regard in which the department is held by the public in general and also by hon. members on all sides of the House.

This Bill has a bearing on all three activities of the department, that is, on the divisions of water affairs, forestry and environmental conservation. In that sense, it is an interesting Bill and, like all conservation measures which come to the House, we see at the root of the problem the great growth of the population. People always talk in terms of population growth, and the figures are rather hackneyed, but it is interesting that if one takes the biomass of man on earth, it is something like 200 million tons, which is second only to the biomass of the krill in the South Atlantic. As the hon. the Minister has said, this Bill seeks to control and eradicate alien vegetation, but it is essentially a Bill dealing with water affairs. One may ask what it has to do with water affairs, but the mountain catchment areas are obviously areas where water is collected. What happens, is that alien vegetation, particularly such as those which the hon. member for Constantia mentioned—pinus pinaster and hakea—cause the natural undergrowth to become degraded. That in turn causes erosion and then, of course, the mountain catchment areas lose their value as mountain catchment areas. In South Africa we have an enormous shortage of water and this, fact will perhaps be one of the most inhibiting factors upon growth and upon a decent quality of life in the future for the burgeoning populations of this region. Therefore any measures that we can take that will stretch our water resources are indeed welcome.

The second function of the Bill, although not a secondary function, is the function that the hon. member opposite and the hon. member for Constantia mentioned. The hon. the Minister went to great lengths in his introductory speech to talk about the problem of invasive plants, which is what we are trying to deal with. Satellite photographs show us that the fynbos areas that exist today have largely retreated to the mountain areas. The great plains have been taken up by agriculture and therefore these species are in a state of retreat to the mountain fastnesses and it is there that one will also have to protect them whilst looking to one’s water resources. The hon. member for Constantia mentioned some figures but I do not think they are correct. Frankly I think they are on the conservative side. Fynbos occupies 1% of South Africa and it is interesting to note that 65% of all threatened species in our country lie within this region. The hon. member quoted some figures on endangered species and I think that he said that 39 species are already extinct.

Those species are already extinct.

39 are extinct and 35 are endangered.

Thousands are under threat.

If one looks at the figures from “Endangered species in a rising tide of human population growth” by the Bolus Herbarium they show that there are 990 species that are very scarce or threatened, 280 are extremely rare, 84 are vulnerable with decreasing plant populations, 68 are threatened with extinction and 60 have disappeared altogether.

The hon. member for Constantia said that he was disappointed in that enough mountain catchment areas have not been proclaimed. It would be interesting if I gave him the figures for those areas that have in fact been proclaimed. In 1976 the department showed that of 351 175 ha of State forest land proclaimed as mountain catchment areas, 180 712 ha were infested by either hakea or pinaster and that of the proclaimed mountain catchment areas in private ownership totalling some 313 430 ha, 102 847 ha were infested. Then, of course, the private land outside of the proclaimed mountain catchment areas is over 100 000 ha in extent.

The hon. member said that he could not understand why we did not proclaim the extra 5 km but I think the reason for this is very simple. If one followed that principle one would go on proclaiming until one was blue in the face. From time to time in certain valleys in the mountain catchment areas that are contiguous with the mountain areas one finds pockets of invasive species. One wants to be able to deal with those species on an ad hoc basis without necessarily proclaiming areas that are not in any real sense mountain catchment areas. I think that is the explanation for the problem and something to be hoped for.

To indicate to hon. members what a very urgent problem we are dealing with and how rampant the situation is, I want to point out that in the Albertinia, Still Bay, Riversdale, Heidelberg district …

Now you are talking about a great part of the country.

It is a beautiful region. The acacia cyclops was planted 30 years ago in that area and it took 30 years, only 30 short years after having been planted in a very limited area on the coast to invade 41 000 ha of fynbos inland. It spread like a veld fire and this is something that presents us with an enormous responsibility in dealing with it. We have all said that we have a problem in this regard and so we must ask ourselves what the department is doing to solve this problem. It is interesting to note if one looks at the figures that since 1976, 64 312 ha have been cleared of hakea and pinaster by the department in the Cape. This is not only the case in the Western Cape. The hon. member spoke about the Western Cape and, of course, that is primary to his interests. This is also true in regard to the South-west Cape and parts of the Eastern Cape.

In order to indicate the urgency with which this matter is viewed by the department and the priority that is accorded it, how seriously they view it, and how, in a sense we are all preaching to the converted, it will be interesting to see what the department has done. In 1975-76 the department cleared 338 ha. In 1980-’81 the department cleared 28 124 ha. From these figures one can see what a very great priority this matter has become in the department and one is extremely grateful for the fantastic work the department is doing in this regard. It is easy to talk about clearing land, but this is a difficult, a dangerous and a highly expensive business. It means clambering up mountainsides, hacking out this growth by hand, pulling out, weeding, cutting and burning in parts of the country that are all but inaccessible. I want to pay tribute today to those men who do this job. This is a difficult job, it is a time-consuming job and I think that they are doing fantastic work. If the hon. the Minister has some means of conveying the thanks of this House to those men who are doing this work, I would be extremely grateful. It is not simply a question of hacking out some acacia and thinking that that is the end of the problem. The fact is that one has to keep on weeding the area for a period of at least ten years after that. This means that as one continues to clear more land the scale of one’s problem becomes absolutely colossal. All of these newly cleared areas have continually to be weeded and cleaned and so forth. When one considers that in the case of acacia saligna the seeds can lie dormant for a period before germination of up to 160 years, one begins to realize the sort of problem that we are dealing with. When one considers if one does a seed count at the base of some of these trees that that seed count is something of the order of 10 000 seeds per square metre and, as I say, some of these seeds have a germination life of over 100 years, one begins to understand the type of problems with which the department can be faced.

*I wish to convey my sincere thanks to the department for the fantastic work they are doing.

I think it is very important that I should make this point: It is not the intention of the department to interfere with agriculture. In fact, nothing could be further removed from the department’s intentions. However, the problem is so vast—I hope I have succeeded in sketching just how vast the problem actually is—that the department, as well as other departments, will do more to combat the problem or to make it possible for something to be done to rectify the position.

In the annual report of the Department of Agricultural Technical Services for the period 1 July 1979 to 31 March 1980 there is a chapter entitled “Agricultural Resource Utilization”. The chapter ends under the heading “concluding remark” and I quote from page 94 of the report—

This action on the part of the Department of Agriculture is to be welcomed because it will also alleviate the work of the Department of Water Affairs, Forestry and Environmental Conservation.

†In closing, Mr. Speaker, I want to say that it is very easy for the hon. member for Constantia, myself and also the hon. member for Mooi River to talk—because we talk very loosely and glibly—about the question of extinction. However, it is a very serious business because one need only to think of the great dinosaurs which once roamed the earth but have since become extinct. The time of the so-called “Great Dying”.

It is estimated that one specie became extinct every thousand years during a period which is now regarded as a steep and cataclysmic decline. One should consider that between the year 1600 and the year 1900 we lost one specie every four years. On the other hand we lost one specie per year this century.

Did we lose dinosaurs?

No, one specie of plant or animal life, and so forth.

It is estimated that now, in the ’80s, we are losing one specie per hour. When one considers that at the time the dinosaurs became extinct one specie was lost every thousand years and that we are now losing one specie per hour as we are moving into the ’80s, it is clear what sort of biological débâcle we are headed for. As we are conserving our water resources through this Bill, we are also protecting our fynbos and are complying with our inter-generational responsibility towards the natural and renewable resources of our country. For that reason I have great pleasure in supporting this measure.

Mr. Speaker, I have the feeling that we are preaching to the converted tonight, and I am therefore not going to go on unnecessarily. No one who is concerned with conservation is going to find fault with this Bill. However, I would like to touch on a few points. One of these concerns the eradication of encroaching problem vegetation which is referred to in the proposed section 3(1)(ii). This provides for the destruction of such vegetation in a defined area outside the catchment area. The hon. the Minister very wisely left the interpretation of the term “alien vegetation” open to the widest possible interpretation. He has not restricted it to “noxious weeds”, for example. I think this is wise because, after all, a weed has been defined by gardeners as “a plant which grows where it is not wanted”, and this comprehensive definition applies in this case. For example, indigenous vegetation can sometimes be considered desirable in one catchment area and undesirable in another. I am thinking in particular of the shrub known as “ouhout”, leucosidea serrisea. In some parts of the country, for example the Drakensberg, this plant is considered as a desirable plant, while in others, such as the Winterberg and Kagaberg, it is considered undesirable. We could accordingly not name “ouhout” a noxious weed in order to have it eradicated. I can think of very few exotic plant species which are desirable in our mountain catchment areas, and when I say that, I mean aesthetically desirable. The “green cancer” of Hakea which the hon. member for Constantia referred to is one of the worst offenders, and the sooner it can be eradicated the better.

Unfortunately this is easier said than done, but the threat that these plants pose is such that we cannot afford to allow them to grow unrestricted. However, there is a problem when one talks in terms of protecting the mountain catchment areas in order to control the run-off of water, because sometimes exotic plants growing in the mountain catchment areas can serve the purpose of restricting run-off water just as well as indigenous vegetation. These encroaching plants do not necessarily constitute a threat to rainfall absorption, and here the eradication of these plants must obviously take place for ecological reasons rather than for practical reasons. However, I hope that this is not going to deter the hon. the Minister and his department from taking steps to eradicate encroaching exotic plants where they are found in catchment areas.

I should like to comment briefly on what the hon. member for Standerton told us in regard to nasella grass, because this is a terrible weed in our country. We use the term “eradicating” very easily and lightly and often when we use it we are thinking in terms of “controlling” only. For example, we talk of eradicating jointed cactus, but we know that we will never be able to eradicate it, that it is here permanently. We simply try to control it. However, I believe that in the case of nasella we must talk of “eradication”. We cannot allow nasella grass to continue to grow in our country. It must be eradicated. However, I think the hon. the Minister’s department is aware of this and I believe that they will take the necessary steps to rid our mountain catchment areas of it.

I should like to appeal to the hon. the Minister also to consider the serious position in parts of the country which have not yet been declared mountain catchment areas, but in which there are serious incursions of encroaching undesirable vegetation. In this regard I have the mountainous area near Grahamstown in mind. In this area, black wattle, golden wattle and rooikrans are found. They have spread up the coastal corridor and now constitute a serious threat to those areas. These weeds quite often spread along railway lines, along the national roads and in river valleys. I mention this because I believe that in order to get on top of this problem, all interested parties, not only the private sector, but also the hon. the Minister’s department, and the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, should combine to make this eradication more effective.

The last point that I wish to raise concerns fire protection in mountain catchment areas and I want to refer briefly to problems associated with the South African Railways. Fortunately, the main offender, the old steam engine, is now being phased out, but there are still places in the country where in dry winters, valuable catchment areas can be reduced to ashes by a single spark. There is a great deal of dissatisfaction among landowners about the provisions of the legislation concerning the maintenance of fire breaks, and the whole question of liability and compensation. However, this is a problem that can more profitably be raised in a more appropriate debate. I do however, believe that it is in the interests of the Department of Water Affairs, Forestry and Environmental Conservation, the mountain catchment areas where fires could occur, and the landowners adjacent to these areas, to conduct an in-depth investigation into legislation associated with the prevention and control of fires so that this whole area can be better catered for.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot see how we are going to speak on the Bill for such a long time if everyone agrees on it.

Now you are doing so too.

The primary purpose of this legislation is the conservation of water, and this goes hand in hand with sensible nature conservation. The hon. the Minister has already issued directions within such a declared mountain catchment area and all landowners are bound by these directions. Many of those owners are fanners, and of course these directions place a financial burden upon the farmers. However, we farmers are used to suffering, and it will make no impression upon us. However, as befits a good Government—like the Government that we have now—provision is being made for financial assistance to farmers to clear the catchment area or to keep it clear, or otherwise the State can do so itself. This is only right, because all of us use this water, not only the farmers. Therefore the State must help too, because the vast majority of this water goes to the towns and cities and the water must be pure. What would happen if polluted water had to reach the city, because the entire Opposition lives in the cities? If they were to use the water, we would soon be without any Opposition. [Interjections.]

This legislation now aims at establishing a buffer strip 5 km wide outside the catchment area, and all directions must also be applicable there. After all, one has heard of how all conceivable types of rubbish grow outside the catchment area. Then the wind blows the seed and the tuffs into the streams. In the courses of the mountain peaks the whole area is plagued by these—I do not know all the big names—hakea, that nasty thing … [Interjections] … which is a terrible threat. Then there is the other thing that they call the pinaster. Is that the thing that the hon. member had? [Interjections.] In our area we also encountered a patch of dagga. [Interjections.] I am not going to say where it was, because then certain hon. members will bother me. [Interjections.] This extension of that strip is a very good thing. Now it is not only the face that is being washed, but the ears and the mouth and the rest too. [Interjections.]

What is the rest?

The whole caboodle. [Interjections.] This legislation also provides for the establishment of advisory committees which involve everyone who has an interest in this matter. The hon. the Minister will now appoint organizations who can nominate member on these committees and therefore if oom Jan dies, these committees can simply go ahead and nominate oom Piet. It is no longer necessary for the hon. the Minister to do so. It is less work for the officials. This is how our Government works: Clean water, eradicating rubbish and weeds and streamlined legislation. I am pleased to support this Bill. [Interjections.]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank all the hon. members who took part in this debate. I am very glad that there is so much unanimity about conservation. Hon. members ranged far and wide; in fact, even far beyond the boundaries of this Bill. They even started dealing with the Vote. However, I do not begrudge them their enthusiasm. I thank hon. members.

As I see it, in their speeches hon. members saddled me with problems that go far beyond the domain of my department. Some members went off into the Gardens.

*Other hon. members, on the other hand, strewed hair-raising issues across the floor of this House. I want to thank hon. members for their support. There was no hon. member who had any objection to the Bill. There were hon. members who wanted to know why I needed legislation, for I could simply have extended the mountain catchment areas. But it is not all that easy. It can be done, but if one extends the mountain catchment area, one has control measures over a large part of the mountain catchment area, and as the hon. member for Worcester said, the farmers are having a hard time. It is true that they do not mind, but one does not want to cause them more hardship than is necessary. That is why this extension of the provisions deals only with invader plants such as nasella tussock, the pinus pinaster, and so on.

†Where I live in Rondebosch, in a house called Bergzicht, I have a beautiful view of Table Mountain and when I wake up in the mornings I can see with my own eyes—I sometimes use binoculars—what the department is doing in eradicating the pinus pinaster, etc., along the slopes of Table Mountain to benefit the beautiful fynbos.

*I think we could do a great deal of good by telling the world what we have in the fynbos areas. For example we have the Bontebok Park at Swellendam which has a greater variety of flowers than the whole of Europe. That is why I am grateful for the support I am receiving from hon. members.

What about the Free State? Is there nothing there?

There is a great deal there, and outstanding people as well. I just want to warn against one thing, and that is that one should preserve a balanced attitude when it comes to conservation. In the very first chapter of the Bible it is said that earth was given to man to use. We must therefore use the earth, but at the same time conserve it. I am sorry to have to say that among the greatest enemies of the conservation idea are those who exceed all limits and cut down and destroy everything that can be used. I think we must seek a happy medium.

†I now come to the proposal by the hon. member for Mooi River. In principle I have no objection to it, but in practice I think it will lead me into a lot of trouble. Some of these owners cannot be contacted readily. Sometimes it is not necessary to declare a very large area, and if it is only a very small area, one can either notify the people personally or, in the case of a large area, notify them through the Government Gazette. If possible, we will do both, but I do not think we must make it obligatory. I hope the hon. member will accept that.

Mr. Speaker, allow me to say just one more thing to satisfy the hon. member for Constantia. The department is in the process of declaring four more multi-catchment areas in the Western Cape, involving an area of, I think, between 6 000 and 7 000 ha.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a Second Time.

Bill not committed.

Bill read a Third Time.

Mr. Speaker, I move—